DOE/CR-0068-9

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

ANNUAL PERFORMANCE PLAN

 for FY 2001

SECRETARY OF ENERGY

BILL RICHARDSON
Editors Notes

This plan addresses three years of performance: assessment of results on FY 1999 performance goals, final FY 2000

performance goals and proposed FY 2001 performance goals. The significant improvement from the FY 2000 performance plan

is the organization of performance goals under the budget decision units, thus eliminating the need for cross reference matrices.

The Department is concurrently working on updating the Strategic Plan published in September 1997. Although that document

is in the review process we have chosen to indicate annual performance goal linkages for the FY 2001 performance goals to the

new strategic plan objectives.

DOEs Inspector General and the Power Marketing Administrations are included in this plan. However, the Federal Energy

Regulatory Commission (FERC) has prepared separate GPRA documents and their resources but not performance measures are

included in this plan. We are negotiating with FERC to include them in this plan.

This plan was prepared by the Office of the Chief Financial Officer, Office of Strategic Planning and Program Evaluation with

input from all offices in DOE. The DOE point of contact for this document is Bill Kennedy (202) 586-0423,

bill.kennedy@hq.doe.gov or Suneel Kapur (202)586-0110, suneel.k.kapur@hq.doe.gov

This document is available on the World Wide Web as part of the Departments Strategic Management System found at:

http://www.doe.gov/stratmgt
DOE/CR-0068-9

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

ANNUAL PERFORMANCE PLAN

 for FY 2001

SECRETARY OF ENERGY

BILL RICHARDSON
v 

Printed with soy ink on recycled paper.
Table of Contents

Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ii

Resource Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . vii

Annual Performance Goals by DOE Decision Units 

Energy Resources

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

Solar and Renewable Energy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

Nuclear Energy R&D Fast Flux Test Facility . . . . . . . . . . 8

Termination Costs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15

Isotope Support . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17

Uranium Programs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19

Domestic Oil and Gas Supply RD&D . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21

High Efficiency, No/Low Emissions Power Systems RD&D 23

Clean Fuels RD&D . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26

FE R&D Crosscutting and Special Activities . . . . . . . . . . 29

Petroleum Reserves . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30

Building Technology, State and Community Program . . . . 32

Energy Management (FEMP) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36

Industry Sector . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39

Transportation Sector . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42

Energy Information Administration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45

Power Marketing Administration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48

National Security

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51

Defense Programs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55

Arms Control and Nonproliferation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62

Nonproliferation and Verification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66

International Nuclear Safety . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69

Highly Enriched Uranium Transparency Implementation . 72

Fissile Material Disposition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74

Naval Reactors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76

Intelligence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78

Counterintelligence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78

Worker and Community Transition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80

Security and Emergency Operations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82

Independent Oversight & Performance Assurance . . . . . . 87
Table of Contents

Environmental Quality

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91

Environmental Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 94

Civilian Radioactive Waste Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110

Science

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113

High Energy Physics & Nuclear Physics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 116

Biological and Environmental Research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 119

Energy Sciences . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123

Advanced Scientific Computing Research . . . . . . . . . . . . . 126

Fusion Energy Sciences . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 129

Corporate Management

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 131

Environmental Safety and Health . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 134

Departmental Administration & Hearings and Appeals . . 138

Office of the Inspector General . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 152

Appendix A

Criteria for Performance Plan Measures and Goals . . . . . . A1

DOE Office Designations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A2
i

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

OVERVIEW

This Annual Performance Plan for the Department of

Energy expands on the government wide performance plan

for FY 2001 and is an overview of the details contained in

DOEs full budget submission. This plan is a product of

the Departments Strategic Management Systems process

to make DOE more productive and accountable to the

taxpayers. 

Fiscal Year 2001 is the fourth year for which the

Department has prepared a performance plan and the third 

performance plan required by the Government

Performance and Results Act of 1993 (Results Act). The

FY 2001 plan was developed using our experience gained

from :

! developing and using Performance Agreements

between the Secretary of Energy and the President

since FY 1995, 

! reporting the results of those Agreements, 

! developing the DOE Research and Development

Portfolio, the Comprehensive National Energy

Strategy, and Accelerating Cleanup -- Paths to

Closure plan, and 

! reviews by Congress and the General Accounting

Office of our Results Act implementation.

Our Annual Performance Plan includes the results of our

commitments for FY 1999, establishes our final

performance goals for FY 2000, and proposes performance

goals for FY 2001. This year we have reorganized our

presentation to significantly improve the linkages between

resources and results. We are following the structure of

our budget and organizing our performance goals by

budget accounts. To ensure linkage with the Strategic

Plan, we have annotated each performance goal with the

strategic objective it supports.

The budget and management of the operations at the

Department of Energy are intended to be

performance-based and follow the business line format

outlined in the Department's Strategic Plan. This

Performance Plan for FY 2001 identifies what the

taxpayers will receive for the resources entrusted to the

Department of Energy.

To foster a secure and reliable energy

system that is environmentally and

economically sustainable, to be a

responsible steward of the Nation's

nuclear weapons, to clean up our own

facilities, and to support continued United

States leadership in science and

technology.

The Mission of the

Department of Energy is:

To implement this

mission, the resources

requested for FY 2001

are:

$ 18.9 Billion
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

ii

INTRODUCTION

Results for Resources

Our government is becoming more accountable to the

taxpayers through implementation of the Government

Performance and Results Act of 1993 (the Results

Act). This law requires development of long range

strategic plans, annual performance plans, and annual

performance reports. This document is the third annual

performance plan prepared to meet laws requirements

of: (1) establishing performance goals that include the

level of performance to be achieved written in an

objective, quantifiable, and measurable form; (2)

briefly describing the resources required to meet those

performance goals; (3) describing how performance

will be measured and compared with the goals; and (4)

describing how the Department will verify and validate

the measured results. The Presidents Office of

Management and Budget has issued guidance to

agencies for preparing these plans but has given the

Departments flexibility in choosing the appropriate

format.

A Clear Picture of Intended

Performance

This Annual Performance Plan provides a clear picture

of the Department's intended performance for FY 2001

by presenting fiscal year performance goals toward

achieving the mission and goals of the Strategic Plan. 

It should also be noted, however, that this performance

plan is only an overview. The comprehensive set of

performance measures and performance goals are set

forth in the Departments full performance-based

budget. 

The annual goals are improved, means and strategies

for FY 2001 are more meaningful, and the links to the

resources are direct and clearer. To provide context,

the plan includes all performance goals for FY 2000

and related performance goals with their assessments

for FY 1999. The Departments annual Accountability

Report for FY 1999 will present the full results for all

FY 1999 performance goals.

Consistency with the Strategic Plan

and Linkage to the Budget

To ensure consistency with our Strategic Plan, this

Annual Performance Plan begins with our mission as

stated in the Strategic Plan followed by our four

Business Lines and Corporate Management sections. 

Within each business line, this year, we have 

reorganized our presentation to improve the linkages

between resources and results. In the past, we listed 

our annual performance goals organized by strategic

objectives and the long-term strategies of the Strategic

Plan. This year we are following the structure of our

budget and organizing our performance goals by budget

accounts. We are also annotating with each

performance goal the linkage to the Strategic Plan by

identifying the strategic objective it supports. 

We believe this method of linkage is a significant

improvement as it allows a clear relationship between

budget resources and performance goals and the

Strategic Plan; and eliminates the need for crossreference charts to map budget accounts and strategic

objectives. 

The Department is concurrently updating the Strategic

Plan published in September 1997. Although that

document is in the review process we have chosen to

indicate linkages for the FY 2001 performance goals to

the strategic objectives in the new strategic plan. For

FY 1999 and FY 2000 performance goals, we are

continuing to show the linkage with the objectives and

strategies contained in the FY 1997 Strategic Plan.

The following shows the relationship between the

GPRA-specified contents and terminology of a strategic

plan (SP) and annual performance plans (APP) and

where they are found in either DOEs Strategic Plan,

Annual Performance Plan, or both. 

GPRA At DOE

General Goals(SP) ø Business Line Goals (SP&APP)

General Objectives (SP) ø Strategic Objectives (SP&APP)

Strategies (SP) ø Long-term Strategies (SP)

Performance Goals ø Performance Goals (SP)

 & Indicators (APP) ø Annual Performance Goals & 

 Targets for Fiscal Year (APP);

Means & Strategies(APP) ø Means & Strategies for FY(APP)

Adjustments to the Strategic Plan

The Results Act allows adjustments to the strategic

plan through annual performance plans. In the two and

a half years since the original strategic plan was

published in September 1997, three significant strategic
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

iii

planning efforts have been completed. The first

significant strategic planning effort was the

Comprehensive National Energy Strategy, DOE/S0124 (CNES) published in April 1998. The second

major effort was the development of the environmental

management plan, Accelerating Cleanup: Paths to

Closure, DOE/EM-0362 (June 1998). This plan is also

being updated. The third significant effort was the

DOE Research and Development Portfolio, a five

volume comprehensive document, describing for the

first time, our entire $7 billion research portfolio

published in April 1999. The Departments new

Strategic Plan being developed concurrently with this

performance plan uses the results of these efforts.

During the development of the FY 2001 budget,

improvements were made to the performance measures

and goals of the Strategic Plan based on our

experiences with these three efforts and our experience

with the FY 2000 Plan. In addition, we are using a set

of criteria for the performance measures that should be

included in the Departments performance plan based

on our experience with the Performance Agreements

between the Secretary and the President. We want

performance measures and goals to be presidential,

specific, quantified, meaningful, stretching, concise,

written for taxpayers, covering, and auditable. These

criteria are discussed in Appendix A. Comments on

these criteria are invited.

Consultation

In the development of the Department's Strategic Plan,

alternative long-term strategies were considered. 

Through consultation with Congress, other agencies,

and other stakeholder groups, many performance goals

and strategies will be revised and improved. Including

the information from our new strategic plan here will

further facilitate the consultation and review process.

We are incorporating improvements based on the GAO

and Congressional feedback on the FY 1999 and FY

2000 Annual Performance Plans. In addition, we met

with Congressional staff to discuss the new reorganized

format for this plan and accordingly revisions have

been made. Consultation with Congress on the content

of this plan will be conducted through the

Congressional review of the budget. 

The Department recognizes that the preparation of this

annual performance plan is an inherently governmental

function. As such, drafting of the plan was done only

by Federal employees and no non-Federal parties made

any significant contribution.

Improvements to the FY 2000 Plan 

In the report to Congress on the usefulness of Agency

performance plans, GAO noted that DOEs FY 2000

Plan was moderately improved over the FY 1999

plan. Although linking resources to performance goals

was listed as a strength, our own assessment was that it

needed to be clearer. This year we have followed the

structure of our budget and organized our performance

goals by budget accounts. We have also annotated with

each performance goal, the linkage to the Strategic Plan

by identifying the strategic objective it supports. We

believe this method of linkage is a significant

improvement as it shows a clear relationship between

budget resources and performance goals and the

Strategic Plan and eliminates the need for crossreference charts to map budget accounts and strategic

objectives. 

GAO also noted that many of the annual plan's goals

and measures were stated in quantifiable terms, but the

plan's description of expected performance was often

incomplete because no baseline was included to

determine whether goals are reasonable and appropriate

and to measure how the Department's annual

performance compares with the strategic

plan's goals and objectives. GAO observed that this

problem was exacerbated by the way the plan described

past performance in terms of assessment categories. 

We have addressed this concern by meeting with

Congressional staff and agreeing to use the following

terms: EXCEEDED GOAL, MET GOAL, NEARLY

MET GOAL, and BELOW EXPECTATION. We are

not providing percentage ranges to classify each term. 

Instead, we are basing them on the significance of

deviation from the expectation established in the

performance goal. If performance was significantly

above the goal, the term EXCEEDED GOAL is used. 

If performance was less than the goal, but not

significantly less, we used the term NEARLY MET

GOAL. These terms are used in place of simply met

goal or did not meet goal to support managements

intent to have stretch goals and encourage performance. 

The full discussion of the performance is contained in

the FY 1999 Accountability Report which will be

issued by March 1, 2000.

The concern about providing baselines and context for

the annual performance goals is something we have

been working on for several years. This requirement is

already addressed in our criteria (see Appendix A) for

developing good performance goals. Over the years

many of the performance goals have improved but

many still need work. We are continuing to work on
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

iv

this weakness. Another weakness GAO noted was the

lack of information on verification and validation. We

have added a section on verification and validation

under each decision unit rather than addressing it for

the entire Department. 

Validation and Verification of

Performance

Validation and verification of the Departments

performance will be accomplished by periodic

guidance, reviews, certifications, and audits. Because

of the size and diversity of the Departments portfolio,

V&V is supported by extensive automated systems,

external expert analysis, and management reviews. 

Detailed discussions of V&V follow the description of

performance goals and measures for each decision unit

in this Annual Performance Plan.

For the overall Agency, GPRA guidance is issued and

conducted in the Spring when the staff begins to report

on the mid-year status. DOEs end-of-year reporting

process includes certifications by heads of

organizational elements and reviews of records. 

Multiple data sources exist within the program offices

performing the work, the National Laboratories, or our

contractors. The performance reporting process

requires that heads of Departmental elements report the

status of performance commitments in the Secretarys

performance agreement and ensure that the information

provided is accurate and complete. Internal

management controls will continue to be applied to

ensure the data quality and heads of elements formally

certify the accuracy of the data at the end of the year. 

In preparing audited financial statements, the Chief

Financial Officer will issue guidance and conduct

training for Secretarial Officers and their staffs,

stressing their roles in the preparation of the financial

statements and required management representation

letters. Management representation letters attest to the

accuracy and reliability of financial information and

performance results. As requested by the Secretary,

management representation letters will be signed and

provided by all heads of Departmental elements

responsible for performance commitments in the

agreement to the Secretary and included the following

attestation on performance measure information: We

acknowledge our responsibility for the fair presentation

of the performance measure information presented in

the Overview section and the Supplemental Information

of the financial statements. We believe this data to be

accurate and reliable. This attestation will indicate

that each program office is aware of their responsibility

for the performance measure data and the necessary

validation and support documentation to ensure its

accuracy and reliability. 

The Department has been using a computer system

called SOLOMON to collect and present results and

performance assessments for the annual Secretarys

Performance Agreement with the President. It has been

used since the first Performance Agreement for

FY 1995. SOLOMON is a World-Wide-Web based

system to allow remote data entry, monitoring, and

oversight. Data entry is controlled through a password

system that provides an auditable record of changes.

Program offices and managers directly update results

and performance assessments during the year and the

end of year information is used for analysis and

preparation of the Accountability Report. 

In accordance with the Federal Managers Financial

Integrity Act of 1992, the Department will continue

evaluations of its management controls in effect during

the fiscal year. Our evaluations include an assessment

of whether the management controls of the Department

were in compliance with the standards prescribed by

the Comptroller General. The purpose of these

evaluations is to provide reasonable assurance that the

management controls are working effectively, that

program and administrative functions including the

accuracy and reliability of the reporting of performance

results are performed in an economical and efficient

manner consistent with applicable laws, and that assets

were safeguarded against the potential for waste, fraud,

abuse, or mismanagement.

The Departments reporting of performance and

financial information is audited by the Inspector

General. For FY 1996 and FY 1997 we received 

unqualified opinions. For FY 1998 the IGs opinion

was qualified due to weaknesses in the controls over

the Departments environmental liabilities estimation

process. Inspector General also noted weaknesses in

the presentation of the overview and performance

measures. The most recent audit will be published on

March 1st and we will address the weaknesses in the

FY 1999 reporting that affect performance for

FY 2001.
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

v

Management Challenges

The Department has been identifying for the President,

Congress, and ultimately the public, areas of

vulnerability in the operations of Government. DOEs

internal control process has been established to identify

Departmental Management Challenges and develop

plans to address them, under the Federal Managers

Financial Integrity Act of 1982 (FMFIA). In this plan

we have included performance measures for the

planned FY 2000 milestones, addressing these

 Management Challenges. Congress has also asked

that we set annual performance goals for each of the

major management challenges identified by the GAO

and the IG. The following table lists the fourteen major

management challenges identified by the Congress as

part of the FY 2000 Plan assessment, and lists as

applicable the corresponding Departmental Challenge. 

Performance goals related to these challenges are

identified in this plan with a (FMFIA) annotation on

the page numbers noted below with each challenge.

Departments Major Management Challenges

Major Management Challenges at DOE as identified by

GAO/Congress

Management Challenges 

as identified by DOE

(page numbers for related goals)

1. Y2K readiness This was not a Departmental

Management Challenge. 

2. Information security Security (86)

3. Contract management Contract management (141)

4. Difficulty completing large projects Project Management (58, 98, 143)

5. Slow transition to external regulations. Most DOE facilities are

not licensed or inspected by independent regulators

External regulation issues were fully

addressed in FY 1999.

6. DOEs ineffective organizational structure blurs accountability,

allowing problems to go undetected and remain uncorrected

DOE does not consider this a

Management Challenge. Related goals 

are described under CM.

7. DOEs staff lack technical and management skills This was fully addressed in FY 1999. It

is no longer a Management Challenge.

8. Significant environmental compliance and waste management

problems exist at DOE facilities

Environmental Compliance (98)

Nuclear Waste Disposal (101)

9. Nuclear and occupational safety and health deficiencies impair

DOEs ability to ensure the health and welfare of workers and the

public

Safety and Health (135)

10. DOEs schedules for permanent disposal of radioactive waste

generated by nuclear utilities and weapons complex experienced

significant delays

Nuclear Waste Disposal (111)

11. The Department has extensive inventories of nuclear materials that

may no longer be necessary due to the end of the cold war or other

mission changes

Surplus Fissile Materials (74)
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

vi

Departments Major Management Challenges (Continued) 

Major Management Challenges at DOE as identified by

GAO/Congress

Management Challenges 

as identified by DOE

(page numbers for related goals)

12. Much of DOEs infrastructure is in poor condition This was fully addressed in 1998. It is

no longer a Management Challenge.

13. DOE has significant deficiencies in its control over Government

personal property

This was fully addressed in 1998. It is

no longer a Management Challenge.

14. Access to sensitive materials, areas, and information, and physical

security

Security (78, 86)

(Congress/GAO has not identified this as major management

challenge)

Mission Critical Staffing (64, 86, 143)

(Congress/GAO has not identified this as major management

challenge)

Inadequate Audit Coverage (153)

Next Steps for this Plan

This Performance Plan is a proposal associated with the

proposed budget for the Department. Although not

required under the Results Act, but allowed by OMB,

the Department intends to convert this proposal into a

performance agreement once the budget for the

Department is signed into law. The Department has

developed performance agreements after budgets were

enacted since FY 1995. The performance agreement

for FY 2001 will resolve differences between the

proposed budget and performance plan and the enacted

budget. The performance agreement will contain the

proposed performance goals of the Annual

Performance Plan for those activities that are fully

funded and will appropriately adjust those performance

goals that are funded at a level different from the

proposed budget.

The Department intends to report to the public semiannually on the status of performance. Additionally,

the Department will report to the Congress annually as

required by the Results Act, Government Management

Reform Act of 1994, and the DOE Organizational Act

of 1977.

Waivers

The Department is part of the Office of Management

and Budget pilot program using an Accountability

Report to consolidate annual reporting of financial

information as allowed by the Government

Management Reform Act of 1994. The Department

intends that this annual report will also meet the

requirements for an annual performance report in

accordance with the Results Act. The Department has

made no other request for waivers of administrative

requirements to provide managerial flexibility. 
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

vii

RESOURCE REQUIREMENTS

The Department will only achieve its goals and

objectives with adequate financial, human,

infrastructure, and technical resources. Financial

resources appropriated by Congress, have been

adequate to support the Departments tradition of

scientific excellence as evidenced by our innovative

solution to some of the most important scientific,

national security, energy, and environmental challenges

facing Americas future. 

For FY 2001 the Department is requesting $18.9 billion

a 9% increase over the FY2000 appropriation. This

investment of 3% of the total discretionary Federal

spending serves vital National interests of pushing the

frontiers of science for National Security, Energy, and

Environment. Our programs promote scientific

progress; advance peace; ensure the availability of

secure, clean, and efficient energy resources for the

nations economic future; clean up the legacy of the

Cold War; and strengthen safety and health programs

across the DOE complex. 

Our human resources include both Federal and

contractor personnel. The requested funding includes

the cost of 16,221 Full Time Equivalent (FTE) Federal

personnel and about 110,000 contractor personnel.

Although employment reductions since 1995 have

netted $669 million in savings to taxpayers, the

Department now faces significant skills gaps within the

scientific and technical areas and an aging workforce. 

In November 1998, the Secretary of Energy announced

the Department's new Workforce for the 21st Century

Initiative, Workforce 21", as the next step in

strengthening our technical and management capability

to fulfill our critical missions for the Nation. The

Department has also identified Mission Critical

Staffing as a Departmental Challenge for the CFO,

Security Operations, and the Office of Nonproliferation

and National Security.

In the National Security area, the Stockpile Stewardship

Program will require significant investments in

computing and modeling capabilities, experimental

facilities, and nuclear expertise to be able to certify to

the President the safety and reliability of the enduring

stockpile without additional nuclear testing. 

Unprecedented growth in nonproliferation operations in

Russia requires the Department to strengthen and

expand the Moscow Office and to ensure adequate

program management and project oversight by Federal

staff for these highly visible and priority programs.

In order to meet the Nation's needs for cutting-edge

science, DOE must periodically replace or make major

upgrades to aging or outdated major experimental

facilities. These needs will be weighed against the

benefits from cost-effective modifications to existing

facilities to ensure that the maximum national benefits

are derived from existing infrastructurethis

recognizes, however, that many of these science

facilities have a finite useful life. The Secretary of

Energy's Advisory Board has been asked to examine

the long-term needs for advanced scientific research

facilities to accomplish DOE's Science and Technology

objectives. 

Undoubtedly, the continuing push toward a more

seamless, connected science establishment will be aided

by further advances in computation and

communication. Opportunities for laboratory

collaboration, remote experimentation, scientific

simulation as a potential substitute for more costly

experimentation, and sharing and access to vast

quantities of scientific data and information will

continue to place demands on computation and

communication capabilities within the science

programs. 

Resources for Major Acquisitions are addressed in the

Departments Capital Assets Plan.
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

viii

Department of Energy

FY 2001 Budget Request by Business Line

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

Energy

Resources

National

Security

Environmental

Quality

Science Corporate

Management

BUSINESS LINE

BUDGET REQUES

Summary of FY 2001 budget request for the Departments five goals

Business Line Goals FY 2001 Budget Request

(in millions)

Energy Resources: Promote the development and deployment of energy systems

and practices that will provide current and future generations with energy that is

clean, reasonably-priced, and reliable. (EE, FE, NE, PMAs, EIA, & FERC)

$2,247

National Security: Enhance the national security through the military application

of nuclear technology and reduce global danger from weapons of mass destruction.

(CN, DP, IN, MD, NN, NR, OA, SO, & WT)

$6,621

Environmental Quality: Aggressively clean up the environmental legacy of

nuclear weapons and civilian nuclear research and development programs at the

Departments remaining sites, safely manage nuclear materials and spent nuclear

fuel, and permanently dispose of the Nations radioactive wastes. (EM, RW )

$6,670

Science: Produce remarkable insights into our physical and biological world and

the nature of matter and energy, advancing the basic research and instruments of

science that are the foundations for DOEs applied missions and a base for U.S.

technology innovation. (SC)

$3,160

Corporate Management: Demonstrate excellence in the Departments

environment, safety and health; security; and management practices and systems to

support our world class programs. The funds shown for Corporate Management

include Departmental staff and support offices, with adjustment for revenues. 

(CI, CR, ED, EH, GC, HG, IA, IG, MA, PA, PC, PO, S1))

EH $ 166

Others $ 74

Total: $18,938
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

Energy Resources 1

 Energy Flow, 1998 (Quadrillion Btu) (Source: EIA Annual Energy Review 1998)

ENERGY RESOURCES

Energy needs of the United States are diverse and

extensive. Energy is the vital force powering business,

manufacturing, and movement of goods and services

throughout the country. The processes that link U.S.

energy supply, conversion, and transmission systems to

end uses comprise a complex system of technologies

and scientific disciplines. 

The Energy Resources Business Line is made up of

offices working to implement domestic policy on

energy production, distribution, and consumption. The

DOE offices involved in this work are the Offices of

Fossil Energy (FE), Nuclear Energy (NE), and Energy

Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EE). The Power

Marketing Administrations are also funded through this

business line. Finally, the Energy Information

Administration provides independent energy

information for policy makers. 

ENERGY RESOURCES GOAL

Promote the development and deployment of

energy systems and practices that will provide

current and future generations with energy

that is clean, reasonably-priced, and reliable.

The Energy Resources goal is supported by the

following five strategic objectives. 

ER1: Promote reliable, affordable, clean, and

diverse domestic fuel supplies.

ER2: Promote reliable, affordable electricity

supplies that are generated with acceptable

environmental impacts.

ER3: Increase the efficiency and productivity of

energy use, while limiting environmental

impacts.

ER4: Inform public policy makers, energy

industries and the general public by

providing reliable energy information.

 ER5: Cooperate globally on international energy

issues.
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

Energy Resources 2

Energy Consumption by Sector

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020

Ind us t ry

Trans p

B ld g s

S o u r c e s: EIA An n ua l Ene r g y Re vie w 1 9 9 7; EIA An n ua l Ene r g y Out lo o k 1 9 9 9

Oil Use and Ne t Imports

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020

Oil Use

Im p o r t s

S o u r c e s: EIA An n u a l En e r g y R e vie w 1 9 9 7; EIA An n u a l En e r g y Out lo o k 1 9 9 9

Quads

Carbo n Emis s io ns

MtC

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

19701975198019851990199520002005201020152020

S o u r c e : EIA Emissio n s o f Gr e e n h o u s Ga se s in t he Unit e d S t a t e s 1 9 9 7, DOE/ EIA- 0 5 7 3 ( 9 7 )

Carbon emissions

have risen steadily

since 1990 and that

trend is projected to

continue under current

laws and regulations.

Total petroleum

consumption and

petroleum imports are

projected to continue

to rise steadily, with

imports representing

65% of total use by

2020.

The growth in energy

consumption is

occurring across all

three energy sectors.

Quads

The following charts show historical trends and projections for three key indicators related to energy consumption and

use in the United States.
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

Energy Resources 3

The following table maps the Presidential Budgets Program and Financing (P&F) accounts and program activities to the

Department of Energys offices and decision units. The alignment includes aggregation, disaggregation, and

consolidation. The chart that follows this one shows how the decision units support the Departments Strategic Plan

objectives for this business line.

Presidential Budget Program and Financing 

 (P&F) Accounts and Program Activities

FY 2001

Budget

Request

($M)

DOE

Office

DOE Decision Units

 270 Energy Supply

 Solar and Renewable Energy 350 EE Solar & Renewable Energy

55 EE Transportation Sector (Biofuels)

5 EE Energy Management

 Adjustment for Renewable Energy Research 47

Subtotal for Solar and Renewable Energy 457

Nuclear Energy Research & Development 92 NE Nuclear Energy R&D

44 NE Fast Flux Test Facility

74 NE Termination Costs

17 NE Isotope Support

53 NE Uranium Programs

28 NE Program Direction

(2) NE Offset from Revenue Sharing

 Sub-Total Nuclear Energy R&D 306 NE Nuclear Energy

 250 Energy Programs

 Fossil Energy Research and Development

 Clean Coal Technology

376

(155)

FE Domestic Oil & Gas Supply R&D

FE High Efficiency, No/Low

Emissions Power Systems

FE Clean Fuels RD&D

FE FE R&D Crosscutting & Special

Activities

 Naval Petroleum and Oil Shale Reserves 0 FE Petroleum Reserves

 Strategic Petroleum Reserve 158 FE

 SPR Petroleum Account (7) FE

 Elk Hills School Lands Fund 36 FE

 Energy Conservation

Building technology, State and community

programs--non-grant

149 EE Building technology, State and

community programs--non-grant

Building technology, State and community

programs--grant

191 EE Building technology, State and

community programs--grant

Federal energy management program 29 EE Energy Management

Industrial sector 184 EE Industrial Sector

Transportation sector 251 EE Transportation Sector

Policy and management 46 EE Policy and management

 270 Energy Supply

 Energy Information Administration 75 EIA Energy Information Admin.

 Power Marketing Administrations 200 PMA Power Marketing Administrations

TOTAL - Energy Resources $2,247

Note: Revenues from FERC receipts and Colorado River Basin (WAPA) are included under Corporate Management.
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

Energy Resources 4

The Energy Resources goal is supported by five strategic objectives. Each strategic objective is being pursued through

long-term strategies. The Decision Units fund work on those long-term strategies and the annual performance goals are

discussed with the Decision Units on the following pages. DOE Decision Units provide a means to link program

resources at lower levels of aggregation to performance goals. While this approach allows us to clearly link annual

performance with annual budget resources, we are also keeping our strategic plan goals and objectives in focus by 

annotating each performance goal with the strategic objective it supports. 
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

Energy Resources 5

Non-hydro Renewable Energy Generating Capacity

(gigawatts)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

1995 2000 2005 2010

(p) (est.)

(est.)

9.3 GW in 2001

DOE Decision Unit: Solar and Renewable Energy

Presidents Budget

Program and Financing

(P&F) Accounts and

Program Activities

Decision 

Sub-Units

DOE

Office

FY 2000

Comparable Approp.

($M)

FY 2001 

Request

($M)

270 Energy Supply

Solar and Renewable

Energy 

- EE 271 350

Introduction of the Decision Unit:

The mission of the Solar and Renewable Resources Technologies program is to lead the national effort to develop

renewable energy technologies and to accelerate their acceptance and use, nationally and internationally. Within the

Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE), the program supports research and development of clean,

reliable renewable energy technologies and cutting edge power delivery technologies that will improve the performance

and efficiency of electric power systems. The EERE Office of Power Technologies implements the

program activities.

Annual Performance Goals:

Discussion: The Departments research, development

and deployment efforts (past as well as current) will

help triple non-hydroelectric renewable generating

capacity by 2010, with non-hydro capacity being

increased to 9.3 gigawatts in 2001. By 2010, 20% of

new capacity additions will be distributed power

(electric generating systems connected to the

distribution portion of the electricity grid), compared to

5% in 1999. 

One million solar energy systems will be installed by

2010, with 90,000 installed by 2001. Performance

goals are also being developed for enhancing the

electric utility infrastructure through innovative power

system technologies. 

These performance goals support DOE strategic

objective ER2.
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

Energy Resources 6

FY 1999 Results FY 2000 Target (Revised Final) FY 2001 Proposed Target

! Support the Million Solar

Roofs Initiative by installing

15,000 energy systems.

(ER2-3)

(EXCEEDED GOAL)

! Develop codes, standards and

safety specifications for

residential PV roof systems.

(ER2-3)

 (NEARLY MET GOAL)

! Accumulate 750 hours of

reliable operation for a

distributed concentrating

solar power system (ER2-3)

 (EXCEEDED GOAL)

! Complete design of power

plant modifications for cofiring of biomass with coal. 

(ER2-3)

(MET GOAL)

! Develop an industry-led vision

and roadmap for an

integrated bioenergy industry

to advance the development of

biomass derived energy and

its use in domestic and global

markets. (ER2-3)

 (NEARLY MET GOAL)

! Establish a United States

based commercial firm as an

internationally recognized

certification agent using

testing and design review

services provided by the

National Wind Technology

Center. (ER2-3)

(MET GOAL)

! Facilitate the installation of 20,000

solar energy systems in support of the

Million Solar Roofs Initiative,

bringing the total number of installed

systems to 70,000. (ER2-3)

! Develop a 13 percent efficient stable

prototype thin-film photo-voltaic

module. (ER2-3)

! Demonstrate fully autonomous

operation of a 10 kW dish engine

system for off grid applications.

(ER2-3)

! Complete two designs of advanced

air-cooled condensers for geothermal

applications. (ER2-3)

! Complete three projects which will be

co-firing with biomass on a regular

basis. (ER2-3)

! Establish an Interagency Council and

an Advisory Committee on biobased

products and bioenergy. By

April 30, 2000 develop a Strategic

Plan for the development and use of

biobased products and bioenergy as

required by Executive Order 13134.

(ER2-3)

! Install and begin testing of two proofof-concept turbines under Next

Generation Turbine program leading

to commercial availability of

technology capable of producing

electricity at 2 1⁄2 cents per kWh in 15

mph wind resource by 2003. (ER2-3)

! Demonstrate over 90 percent

absorption of CO2 in a sorbent

enhanced reformer reactor for

hydrogen production. (ER5-2)

! Facilitate the installation of

20,000 solar energy systems ,

bringing the total number of

installed systems to 90,000.

(ER2)

! Develop a 14 percent efficient

stable prototype thin-film

photovoltaic module. (ER2)

! Evaluate potential for a small

(1-10 kW) dish based systems to

compete in green distributed

markets before 2005. (ER2)

! Complete testing and evaluation

of a 5 MW Kalina Cycle

demonstration geothermal

power plant. (ER2)

! Initiate testing of one

gasification based cofiring

process. Two additional projects

will have completed testing to

the point of commercial

readiness. (ER5)

! Advanced wind hybrid control

system technology developed

jointly with USDA Agricultural

Research Center will be

commercially available. (ER2)

! Demonstrate Carbon dioxide

free production of hydrogen

using a plasmatron (electric

torch) at 30 kW scale. (ER1)
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

Energy Resources 7

Means and Strategies for FY2001:

Over time, the Department impacts levels of nonhydroelectric energy generating capacity by reducing

the cost of energy (COE) for photovoltaic, wind,

biomass, geothermal and concentrating solar power

technologies. Reduced COE levels will be achieved by

increasing photovoltaic cell efficiency and increasing

U.S. photovoltaic manufacturing capacity; improving

wind turbine designs and validating advanced wind

turbine performance; increasing the reliability of

distributed concentrating solar power systems;

increasing the availability and payback period of

biomass cofiring systems; reducing the cost of biomass

gasification systems; and decreasing the drilling costs

of geothermal systems.

Increasing market penetration of distributed power

systems will be achieved through advances in

technology cost and performance and the

implementation of national standards for

interconnecting distributed power with the grid.

Enhancements to the electric utility infrastructure will

be achieved by: improving the reliability of the system

through development of real time control and

information systems along with fast power electronic

switching; increasing the production of high

temperature superconducting wires; and reducing the

cost and increasing the energy density of energy storage

systems.

Collaboration Activities:

DOE collaborates on its R&D with academia and the

photovoltaic, wind, biomass, concentrating solar power,

and geothermal industries.

External Factors Affecting Performance:

Program funding, the state of the economy and the cost

of competing technologies will affect the installation of

renewable energy systems. Continuation of federal tax

incentives for renewables will also impact performance. 

Validation and Verification:

Data Sources: The Energy Information

Administrations Renewable

Energy Annual and Annual Energy

Outlook.

Baselines: The baseline for tripling capacity is

6.5 gigawatts in 1996.

Frequency: Annual.

Data Storage: The Energy Information

Administration stores the data on

its computers.

Verification: The EIA data will be compared to

trade association data to identify

any significant differences.

Planned Program Evaluation:

Each technology program also holds program reviews

with stakeholders on a periodic basis. An internal

program review for each individual technology program

within the EERE Office of Power Technologies is

conducted annually with the Deputy Assistant

Secretary. In FY 1999, the National Academy of

Sciences National Research Council conducted an

extensive peer review of the Solar and Renewable

Energy Program, both from the perspective of the R&D

activities of each individual technology program and

from the perspective of an overall strategy for the

EERE Office of Power Technologies Solar and

Renewable Energy Program.
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

Energy Resources 8

DOE Decision Unit: Nuclear Energy R&D

Presidents Budget

Program and Financing

(P&F) Accounts and

Program Activities

Decision 

Sub-Units

DOE

Office

FY 2000

Comparable Approp.

($M)

FY 2001

Request

($M)

270 Energy Supply

Nuclear Energy R&D - NE 91 92

Description of the Program:

The mission of the Nuclear Energy Research and Development program is to conduct advanced research and

development in areas such as nuclear power and space power systems. In addition, this program supports nuclear

engineering education and the enhancement of the Nations nuclear science infrastructure.

Annual Performance Goals:

FY 1999 Results FY 2000 Target (Revised Final) FY 2001 Proposed Target

! Complete Memorandums of 

Understanding with the

Nuclear Regulatory

Commission and the Electric

Power Research Institute

(EPRI) to guide future

implementation of the Joint

DOE-EPRI Strategic

Research and Development

Plan to Optimize U.S. Nuclear

Power Plants. (ER2-7)

(MET GOAL)

! Establish a peer-reviewed

Nuclear Energy Research

Initiative, initially funded at

$19 million, to select and

conduct investigator-initiated

innovative scientific and

engineering research that will

address the issues facing the

future of nuclear power in the

U.S., including proliferation

concerns, economics, and the

management of nuclear waste. 

(ER2-8)

(MET GOAL)

! Issue the first update to the Joint

DOE/EPRI Strategic Research and

Development Plan to Optimize U.S.

Nuclear Power Plants. (ER2-7)

! Continue Nuclear Energy Research

Initiative (NERI) research to improve

the understanding of new reactor and

fuel cycle concepts, and nuclear waste

management technologies and begin

to develop a preliminary feasibility

assessment of the concepts and

technologies. (ER2-8)

! Advance the state of scientific

knowledge and technology to enable

incorporation of improved

proliferation resistance, safety and

economics in the potential future

design, and development of advanced

reactor and nuclear fuel systems.

(ER2-8)

! Implement a cooperative cost-shared

R&D program by working with

industry, universities, national

laboratories, and the Nuclear

Regulatory Commission, to address

technical issues that could impact

continued operation of current

nuclear power plants. (ER2-7)

! Continue R&D activities

initiated in FY 2000 associated

with managing long term effects

of plant aging. (ER2) 

! Issue an annual update to the

Joint DOE-EPRI Strategic

Research and Development Plan

to Optimize U.S. Nuclear Power

Plants. (ER2)

! Complete the first 3-year phase

of Nuclear Energy Research

Initiative (NERI) research and

development by identifying

feasible and important reactor

and fuel cycle concepts for

continued development. (ER2)

! Initiate the International Clean

Energy Initiative/International

Nuclear Energy Research

Initiative (I-NERI) to promote

bilateral research to improve the

cost, and enhance the safety,

non-proliferation and waste of

future nuclear energy systems.

(ER2)
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

Energy Resources 9

FY 1999 Results FY 2000 Target (Revised Final) FY 2001 Proposed Target

! Support U.S. universities

nuclear energy research and

education capabilities by:

S Providing fresh fuel to all 

university reactors requiring

this service.

S Funding at least 20

universities with research

reactors for reactor upgrades

and improvements.

S Partnering with 19 or more

private companies to fund

DOE/Industry Matching

Grants Program for

universities.

S Increasing the funding for

Reactor Sharing by 40 percent

over FY 1998, enabling each

of the 26 schools involved in

the program to improve the

use of their reactors for

teaching, training, and

education within the

surrounding community.

(ST4-1)

(MET GOAL)

! Complete bench scale

demonstration of the process to

recover Pu-238 scrap for reuse in

power systems for future missions

using radioisotope power

systems. (SC2-1)

! Execute industrial contract and

initiate associated laboratory

efforts to develop small

Radioisotope Thermoelectric

Generators (RTGs) for

anticipated use on NASAs

Europa Orbiter and Pluto/Kuiper

missions planned for launch in

2003 and 2004. (SC2-1)

! Support U.S. universities nuclear

energy research and education

capabilities by: 

- Providing fresh fuel to all

university reactors requiring

this service;

- Providing funding for reactor

upgrades and improvements at

least 23 universities;

- Partnering with 17 or more

private companies to fund

DOE/Industry Matching Grants

Programs for universities;

- Increasing the funding for

Reactor Sharing by 20 percent

over FY 1998, enabling each of

the 29 schools eligible for the

program to improve the use of

their reactors for teaching,

training, and education within

the surrounding community.

(SC4-1)

! Bring Pu-238 scrap recovery line

to full operation and process two

kilograms of Pu-238 scrap for

reuse in ongoing missions

requiring the use of radioisotope

power systems. SC4)

! Complete final design and initiate

fabrication of small Radioisotope

Thermoelectric Generators (RTGs)

for anticipated use on NASAs

Europa Orbiter and Pluto/Kuiper

missions planned for launch in

2003 and 2004. (SC4)

! Support U.S. universities nuclear

energy research and education

capabilities by:

S Providing fresh fuel to all

university reactors requiring this

service.

S Funding at least 23 universities

with research reactors for

reactor upgrades and

improvements.

S Partnering with 17 or more

private companies to fund

DOE/Industry Matching Grants

Program for universities.

S Continue to support Reactor

Sharing enabling each of the 29

schools eligible for the program

to improve the use of their

reactors for teaching, training,

and education within the

surrounding community. (SC4)
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

Energy Resources 10

FY 1999 Results FY 2000 Target (Revised Final) FY 2001 Proposed Target

! Attract outstanding U.S.

students to pursue nuclear

engineering degrees by:

 SIncreasing the number of

fellowships from 14 to 22.

S Increasing the number of

Nuclear Engineering

Education Grants from 19

to over 40.

S Providing summer on-thejob training to 29 junior and

senior nuclear engineering

scholarship recipients.

(ST4)

 (MET GOAL)

! Attract outstanding U.S. students

to pursue nuclear engineering

degrees by:

S Providing 18-20 fellowships;

S Increasing the number of

Nuclear Engineering Education

Grants to 45 existing and new

grants;

S Providing scholarships and

summer on-the-job training to

approximately 50 sophomore,

junior and senior nuclear

engineering and science

scholarship recipients.

(SC4-1)

[The Department completed the

Accelerator Transmutation of Waste

Roadmap and provided the report to

Congress on November 1, 1999]

! Attract outstanding U.S. students to

pursue nuclear engineering degrees

by:

S Providing 22-24 fellowships.

S Increasing the number of Nuclear

Engineering Education Grants to

approximately 45 existing and new

grants.

S Providing scholarships to

approximately 50 sophomore,

junior and senior nuclear

engineering and science

scholarship recipients including a

new initiative partnering minority

institutions with nuclear

engineering schools to allow these

students to achieve a degree in

their chosen course of study and

nuclear engineering. (SC4) 

! Complete the evaluation of the trade

studies and experimental data on the

lead-bismuth loop under the

Accelerator Transmutation of Waste

(ATW) program initiated in FY 2000. 

Develop a detailed program plan

with recommendations for review by

the Nuclear Energy Research

Advisory Committee (NERAC), and

submit the final plan to OMB, OSTP,

and Congress. (EQ6)

Means and Strategies for FY 2001:

The Department will: (1) conduct investigator-initiated,

peer-reviewed research and development at

universities, national laboratories, and industrial

organizations to advance the scientific knowledge base

and develop new technologies that will address the

principal obstacles to the expanded use of nuclear

energy, advance the state of nuclear technology for a

competitive marketplace, and help maintain a nuclear

science and technology infrastructure to meet future

technical challenges; (2) continue to conduct

government-industry cost-shared, peer-reviewed,

research and development to address the issues

associated with long term operation of existing nuclear

power plants and to apply new technology to improve

plant reliability and availability; (3) develop,

demonstrate, test, and deliver advanced radioisotope

power systems for space and national security missions;

(4) identify, fund, and perform site maintenance,

construction upgrade projects, and environmental

compliance activities in accordance with DOE, Federal,

and State requirements; (5) support and promote

university, college, and preparatory technology

programs that deliver information and contribute to

learning in nuclear science and engineering education,

enable advanced educational research opportunities,

build capabilities at educational institutions, and

improve educational opportunities for diverse groups;

and (6) once the Department has evaluated the trade

studies, and experimental data on the lead-bismuth

loop, including test data on the performance of the

Russian lead-bismuth target, a detailed program plan

with recommendations will be generated, reviewed by
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

Energy Resources 11

the Nuclear Energy Research and Advisory Committee

(NERAC), and provided to OMB, OSTP, and

Congress. Until such time the Department will defer

funding of the science and engineering based research

on the Accelerator Transmutation of Waste program.

Collaboration Activities:

The Department will work closely with the Nuclear

Reactor Technology Lead Laboratories -- Idaho

National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory

(INEEL) and Argonne National Laboratory (ANL)  to

maintain and apply well-qualified technical capabilities

to assure the Department is maximizing its investment

in nuclear reactor technology research and

development.

The Department and the Nuclear Regulatory

Commission (NRC) coordinate program planning to

assure that their research and development activities are

complimentary, cost-effective, and without duplication. 

The Nuclear Energy Research Advisory Committee

(NERAC) will provide advice on the conduct of the

Nuclear Energy Plant Optimization (NEPO) and

Nuclear Energy Research Initiative (NERI) research

and development programs.

NEPO will be conducted on a 50-50 cost-shared basis

with industry consistent with the updated Joint DOEElectric Power Research Institute Strategic Research

and Development Plan to Optimize U.S. Nuclear Power

Plants to be issued in FY 2000. The projects for

NEPO will be conducted at national laboratories,

industrial organizations, and universities in close

coordination with the NRC.

The NERI program encourages research and

development collaboration among scientific and

engineering researchers at universities, national

laboratories and industry to maximize the use of

available talent. In addition, the NERI program

endorses foreign participation by international nuclear

energy research organizations with U. S. participants to

help maintain the nuclear option worldwide and to

leverage research funds.

In FY 2001, the Department will initiate bilateral 

research through the International Clean Energy

Initiative/International Nuclear Energy Research

Initiative (I-NERI), focused on advanced technologies

to improve the cost and enhance safety, proliferation

resistance and waste management of advanced nuclear

energy systems. I-NERI research will be conducted on

a 50-50 cost-shared basis.

The Presidents Committee of Advisors on Science and

Technology (PCAST) Panel on Federal Energy

Research and Development will provide

recommendations on the NERI research and

development program. 

The Department and the agencies which use

radioisotope power systems closely coordinate their

planning activities to ensure that the power systems

built by DOE meet their mission safety, design, and

launch schedule requirements. Prior to the launch of a

mission using radioisotope power systems, DOE

coordinates all launch safety activities with the White

House Office of Science and Technology Policy and

the Interagency Nuclear Safety Review Panel. 

The University program uses an informal advisory

group, The University Working Group, which helps

coordinate, advise, and guide DOE and University

efforts to improve nuclear engineering education in the

U.S. 

A future deployed Accelerator Transmutation of Waste

(ATW) system has the potential to significantly reduce

the radioactive toxicity and volume of civilian spent

nuclear fuel (waste) and at the same time produce

electricity to help offset the cost of the overall program. 

The ATW program involves several national

laboratories, universities and industrial organizations. 

A key strategy of the program is to collaborate with

international efforts in Japan and Europe which have

been conducting research into accelerator driven

transmutation systems for several years. Russia has

unique experience in lead-bismuth eutectic coolant

technology which is being shared and developed further

in collaboration with the ATW program.

External Factors Affecting Performance:

External factors affecting performance of the NEPO

program include: (1) funding from industry and NRC,

(2) Kyoto protocol impact on U.S. Energy markets and

economics, (3) long-term National energy policy, (4)

deregulation legislation implementation and (5) Clean

Air Act legislation.

Changing mission requirements from agencies who use

radioisotope power systems and risk associated with

technological developments could affect the

Departments ability to deliver these systems in a timely

manner to user agencies.

Industry participation in the DOE Matching Grants

program is essentially to trigger a DOE cost-share for
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

Energy Resources 12

this activity which supports nuclear engineering

education at 21 U.S. universities. 

Validation and Verification:

Data

Sources:

Monthly and quarterly technical

reports; quarterly, semiannual, and 

annual reviews.

Baselines: Technical baselines are specified in

project plans and contracts.

Frequency: Data is collected periodicallyon a

monthly basis for some programs;

quarterly and semiannually for 

others.

Data

Storage:

The headquarters and field

organization managing the project

maintains the data on technical

progress.

Verification: Internal, independent technical expert,

or peer reviews of technical reports

and progress are conducted.

Planned Program Evaluation:

Progress against established plans is evaluated by

periodic internal and external reviews. These reviews

provide an opportunity to verify and validate the

performance data. Monthly, quarterly, semiannual and

annual reviews consistent with specific program

management plans are held to ensure technical

progress, cost and schedule adherence, and

responsiveness to user agencies requirements. These

reviews are supplemented by the following:

For NEPO, meetings with NERAC, NERAC

Subcommittee on Operating Plants, EPRI Nuclear

Power Council, NRC, and the Coordinating Committee

for the Joint DOE-EPRI Strategic R&D Plan will be the

basis for assessment and evaluation for the program. 

Recommendations resulting from committee reviews

will be incorporated in the updated Joint DOE-EPRI

Strategic R&D Plan.

NERI, including the International Clean Energy

Initiative/I-NERI, program evaluations will be

conducted by the NERAC Subcommittee for Long

Range R&D.

For ATW, at least one program management and

technical assessment will be conducted per year by the

project office with assistance from a team of technical

subject matter experts not directly involved in the

program. An external review of the program by

NERAC may also be performed.
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

Energy Resources 13

DOE Decision Unit: Fast Flux Test Facility

Presidents Budget

Program and Financing

(P&F) Accounts and

Program Activities

Decision 

Sub- Units

DOE

Office

FY 2000

Comparable

Approp.

($M)

FY 2000

Request

($M)

270 Energy Supply

Fast Flux Test Facility - NE 28 44

Description of the Program:

The Fast Flux Test Facility (FFTF) program provides for the safe and cost-effective maintenance of the FFTF. The

FFTF is the Departments only steady-state source for high-energy, high-fluence neutrons to support nuclear research

and medical isotope production missions. The FFTF is being maintained in standby while the Department completes a

National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) review of the environmental impacts associated with enhancing the

Departments nuclear research facility infrastructure, including the potential restart of the FFTF.

Annual Performance Goals:

FY 1999 Results FY 2000 Target (Revised Final) FY 2001 Proposed Target

! Maintain the Fast Flux Test

Facility in a safe,

environmentally-compliant

standby condition to permit

implementation of an anticipated

Secretarial decision in FY 1999

to deactivate or pursue potential

restart to support a range of

national research requirements.

(EQ6)

 (MET GOAL)

! Maintain the Fast Flux Test

Facility in a safe,

environmentally-compliant

standby condition while

implementing a Secretarial

decision to conduct a National

Environmental Policy Act review

of the environmental impacts of

returning the facility to

operation. (EQ2-4)

! Complete the National

Environmental Policy Act review of

the environmental impacts of

enhancing the Departments

nuclear research facility

infrastructure and issue a Record of

Decision. (SC4)

! Begin implementation of the Record

of Decision which could include

either restarting or permanently

shutting down the FFTF. (SC4)

Means and Strategies for FY 2001:

The Department will ensure that essential systems,

staffing, and support services are maintained at the

necessary levels to keep the facility in compliance with

federal and state safety and environmental requirements

and allow implementation of the Record of Decision

expected in FY 2001.

External Factors Affecting Performance:

FY 2000 funding uncertainties and shortfalls may result

in staff reductions and loss of expertise. Recovery

from these reductions in FY 2001 would slow, or

possibly delay until the next fiscal year, implementation

of the Record of Decision to either restart or deactivate

the facility.
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

Energy Resources 14

Validation and Verification:

Data

Sources:

Monthly and quarterly technical

reports; quarterly, semiannual, and

annual reviews.

Data

Sources:

Monthly and quarterly technical

reports; quarterly, semiannual, and

annual reviews.

Baselines: Technical baselines are specified in

project plans and contracts.

Frequency: Data is collected periodicallyon a

monthly basis for some programs;

quarterly and semiannually for

others.

Data Storage: The headquarters and field

organization managing the project

maintains the data on technical

progress.

Verification: Internal, independent technical

expert, or peer reviews of technical

reports and progress are conducted.

Planned Program Evaluation:

The Fast Flux Test Facility program is continuously

and closely monitored through the use of: weekly

telephone conference calls between headquarters, the

field, and the contractor; weekly and monthly reports

on technical, cost, and schedule milestones; and on-site

program review meetings conducted at least twice a

year. 
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

Energy Resources 15

DOE Decision Unit: Termination Costs 

Presidents Budget

Program and Financing

(P&F) Accounts and

Program Activities

Decision 

Sub-Units

DOE

Office

FY 2000

Comparable Approp.

($M)

FY 2001

Request

($M)

270 Energy Supply

Termination Costs - NE 79 74

Description of the Program:

The mission of this program is to manage the Departments vital research and development facilities, such as those at

Argonne National Laboratory, and to carry out long-term treatment and management of DOEs sodium-bonded spent

nuclear fuel. The name of this program is inconsistent with its current missionthe Department believes that the name of

this program should be the Nuclear Facilities Management program.

Annual Performance Goals:

FY 1999 Results FY 2000 Target (Revised Final) FY 2001 Proposed Target

! Complete the demonstration of

the electrometallurgical spent

fuel treatment technology by

the end of FY 1999 using

Experimental Breeder

Reactor-II spent nuclear fuel. 

(EQ6)

(MET GOAL)

! Complete the conversion and

disposition of 100 percent of

the secondary sodium coolant

from the Experimental

Breeder Reactor-II and 40

percent of the Fermi reactor

sodium coolant in storage at

Argonne National LaboratoryWest. (EQ6)

(NEARLY MET GOAL)

! Complete the conversion and

disposition of 100 percent of the

secondary sodium coolant from

the Experimental Breeder

Reactor-II and 40 percent of the

Fermi reactor sodium coolant in

storage at Argonne National

Laboratory-West. (EQ2-4)

! Initiate draining sodium from

EBR-II primary system and

processing it for disposal.

(EQ2-4)

! Complete the Fuel Conditioning

maintenance items and resume

sodium-bonded fuel treatment

activities if electrometallurgical

treatment is chosen as the most

appropriate technology. (EQ2-4)

! Complete draining the EBR-II

primary system and process 100

percent of all EBR-II sodium in

compliance with the INEEL Site

Treatment Plan. (EQ5)

! Complete the conversion and

disposition of 100 percent of the

Fermi reactor sodium coolant in

storage at Argonne National

Laboratory-West. (EQ5) 

! If electrometallurgical treatment is

chosen as the most appropriate

disposal technology, treat 0.6

MTHM of EBR-II spent nuclear fuel.

 (EQ5)

! Implement the DOE Lead

Laboratory charter and develop

comprehensive proposals for

research and development projects

that contribute to the effort to

develop new nuclear energy

technologies. (SC4)
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

Energy Resources 16

Means and Strategies for FY 2001:

The Department will apply its well-qualified technical

staff and unique test facilities to the performance of

innovative research, development, and application of

nuclear energy technologies. Through this

programmatic activity, the Department will resolve

spent nuclear fuel disposition problems, improve

nuclear technologies, and maintain nuclear power as a

viable option for future United States energy supply. 

The Department will also develop proposals and

identify funding strategies for comprehensive research

and development projects that will contribute to the

goal of developing new nuclear energy technologies. 

Operating costs will be reduced by continuing

deactivation of surplus nuclear facilities and placing

them in a radiologically and industrially safe and stable

shutdown condition. In support of nuclear facility

deactivation, the Department will, dependent upon the

outcome of the National Environmental Policy Act

review, implement electrometallurgical treatment, or

some other technology, to effect disposition of DOE

sodium-bonded spent nuclear fuel.

Collaboration Activities:

Through implementation of the Lead Laboratory

charter, the Department will strengthen its relationship

with universities, and laboratories and institutions that

are not specifically sponsored or managed by DOE.

External Factors Affecting Performance:

None

Validation and Verification:

Data

Sources:

Monthly and quarterly technical

reports; quarterly, semiannual, and

annual reviews.

Baselines: Technical baselines are specified in

project plans and contracts.

Frequency: Data is collected periodicallyon a

monthly basis for some programs;

quarterly and semiannually for

others.

Data Storage: The headquarters and field

organization managing the project

maintains the data on technical

progress.

Verification: Internal, independent technical

expert, or peer reviews of technical

reports and progress are conducted.

Planned Program Evaluation:

The Termination Costs program staff discuss progress

against established plans at monthly tele-video

conferences with the Chicago Operations Office Group

responsible for Argonne National laboratory (ANL)

and ANL-West staff. In addition, semiannual and

annual program reviews are held to verify and validate

the performance data.
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

Energy Resources 17

DOE Decision Unit: Isotope Support

Presidents Budget

Program and Financing

(P&F) Accounts and

Program Activities

Decision

Sub-Units

DOE

Office

FY 2000

Comparable Approp.

($M)

FY 2001

Request

($M)

270 Energy Supply

Isotope Support - NE 20 17

Description of the Program:

The mission of the Isotope Program is to serve the national need for a reliable supply of isotope products, services, and

related technology used in medicine, industry, and research.

Annual Performance Goals:

FY 1999 Results FY 2000 Target (Revised Final) FY 2001 Proposed Target

! Supply quality stable and

radioactive isotopes for

industrial, research, and

medical applications that

continue to meet customer

specifications and maintain 95

percent on-time deliveries.

 (ST2-1)

(EXCEEDED GOAL)

! Initiate construction and

commissioning of the Los

Alamos Isotope Production

Facility to improve isotope

quality with greater operating

efficiency. (ST2-1)

 (MET GOAL)

! Complete equipment

installation necessary for an

emergency backup supply of

molybdenum-99, issue a

request for proposals to

privatize molybdenum-99

production and business

activities by May 1999, and

after evaluation, award a

contract by September 1999 to

the most qualified firm. (ST2-1)

(NEARLY MET GOAL)

! Supply quality stable and

radioactive isotopes for

industrial, research, and

medical applications that

continue to meet customer

specifications and maintain 95

percent on-time deliveries.

(SC2-1)

! Complete at least 60 percent of

the construction of the Los

Alamos Isotope Production

Facility, which is needed for the

production of short-lived

isotopes for medical research.

(SC2-1)

! Invest in two new process

development technologies as

requested by researchers that 

enhance isotope production,

services and delivery application

systems. (SC2-1)

! Implement the Advanced

Nuclear Medicine Initiative by

providing isotopes or financial

assistance for at least five

researchers. (SC2-1)

! Supply quality stable and radioactive

isotopes for industrial, research, and

medical applications that continue to

meet customer specifications and

maintain 95 percent on-time

deliveries. (SC4)

! Complete 90 percent of the

construction of the Los Alamos

Isotope Production Facility, which is

needed for the production of shortlived isotopes for medical research. 

(SC4)

! Invest in two new process

development technologies as

requested by researchers that 

enhance isotope production, services

and delivery application systems. 

(SC2)

! Continue implementation of the

Advanced Nuclear Medicine

Initiative by providing isotopes or

financial assistance for at least 

7 to 10 researchers. (SC4)
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

Energy Resources 18

Means and Strategies for FY 2001:

The Department will develop new or improved isotope

products and services that enable medical diagnoses

and therapy, and other applications that are in the

national interest, and encourage private sector

investment in new isotope production ventures and sell

or lease facilities and inventories for commercial

purposes.

Collaboration Activities:

A recent panel of recognized experts in the medical

isotope community, developed a report entitled,

Forecast Future Demand for Medical Isotopes,

prepared for and endorsed by the Nuclear Energy

Research Advisory Committee (NERAC), that

encourages a more extensive collaborative effort

between the Department and the National Institutes of

Health in the areas of basic medical isotope research. 

NERAC is also developing recommendations for the

Departments long-term isotope research and

development plan. In addition, the Isotope Program has

established cooperative supply agreements with

facilities in Russia and South Africa, and the Isotope

Program will seek additional cooperative supply

agreements with other isotope manufacturers to assure

that the U.S. has a reliable diverse supply of important

isotopes.

External Factors Affecting Performance:

The Isotope Program is a user of facilities operated by

other DOE programs. Because of this relationship, any

unscheduled outage or change in production schedules

negatively affects the Isotope Programs revenue and

results in unfilled customer orders unless other foreign

producers can provide those isotopes. Also, the market

drives prices, and as such, can also negatively affect

revenue. 

Validation and Verification:

Data

Sources:

Monthly and quarterly technical

reports; quarterly, semiannual, and

annual reviews.

Baselines: Technical baselines are specified in

project plans and contracts.

Frequency: Data is collected periodicallyon a

monthly basis for some programs;

quarterly and semiannually for

others.

Data Storage: The headquarters and field

organization managing the project

maintains the data on technical

progress.

Verification: Internal, independent technical

expert, or peer reviews of technical

reports and progress are conducted.

Planned Program Evaluation:

The Isotope Program staff holds Financial Meetings,

Budget Meetings, and holds three Program Managers

Meetings and various site visits throughout the year. 

Conferences such as the Society of Nuclear Medicine

Conference are also attended. At these conferences,

workshops are planned to meet with stakeholders and

customers that further assist with gaining knowledge of

the needs of the program.
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

1

The magnitude of the recently identified environmental legacy issues at Paducah and Portsmouth has not been fully determined. 

For this reason, this performance plan does not include activities to be conducted under our FY 2000 Budget Amendment and it

does not address issues that may arise as a result of site surveys and investigations conducted by the Departments Office of

Environment, Safety, and Health.

Energy Resources 19

DOE Decision Unit: Uranium Programs

Presidents Budget

Program and Financing

(P&F) Accounts and

Program Activities

Decision 

Sub-Units

DOE Office FY 2000

Comparable Approp.

($M)

FY 2001

Request

($M)

270 Energy Supply

Uranium Programs - NE 43 53

Description of the Program:

The mission of Uranium Programs is to address the facility and environmental legacies associated with the uranium

enrichment program1

, management of government assets, and associated research and development. Primarily, this

involves the effective management and disposition of the Departments depleted uranium hexafluoride (UF6) and excess

natural uranium inventories.

Annual Performance Goals:

FY 1999 Results FY 2000 Target (Revised Final) FY 2001 Proposed Target

! Met all commitments made

to the Ohio Environmental

Protection Agency and the

Defense Nuclear Facilities

Safety Board to ensure the

safety of the Departments

inventory of depleted

uranium hexafluoride.

(EQ6)

(MET GOAL)

! Remove all highly enriched

uranium oxides from the

Portsmouth site. (NS4)

! Meet commitments to the Ohio

Environmental Protection

Agency, the Tennessee

Department of Environment and

Conservation, and the Defense

Nuclear Facilities Safety Board

to ensure the safety of the

Departments inventory of

depleted UF6. (EQ2-4)

! Initiate procurement to convert the

Departments depleted UF6 inventories. 

(EQ5)

! Meet legal obligations to the Ohio

Environmental Protection Agency and

the Tennessee Department of

Environment and Conservation, and

commitments to the Defense Nuclear

Facilities Safety Board to ensure the

safety of the Departments inventory of

depleted UF6. (EQ5)
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

Energy Resources 20

Means and Strategies for FY 2001:

The Department will continue its efforts to safely

maintain its inventory of depleted uranium hexafluoride

and prepare quickly to convert this material to a more

stable form. This includes maintaining depleted UF6

storage cylinders in an environmentally responsible

manner by conducting annual storage cylinder

inspections and developing and implementing options

to repair cylinders exhibiting accelerated corrosion. In

addition, the Department will begin procurement

activities for the design of conversion facilities.

Collaboration Activities:

The Department assists the Nuclear Regulatory

Commission in preparing annual reports on the safety

status of the diffusion plants. The Department also

performs analysis in consultation with the uranium

industry in support of the Secretary of Energys

determination with regard to the impact of the sale of

excess Departmental uranium on the uranium

industries.

External Factors Affecting Performance:

None.

Validation and Verification:

Data Sources: Monthly and quarterly technical

reports; quarterly, semiannual, and

annual reviews.

Baselines: Technical baselines are specified

in project plans and contracts.

Frequency: Data is collected periodicallyon a

monthly basis for some programs;

quarterly and semiannually for

others.

Data Storage: The headquarters and field

organization managing the project

maintains the data on technical

progress.

Verification: Internal, independent technical

expert, or peer reviews of

technical reports and progress are

conducted.

Planned Program Evaluation:

The Department will use internal and external reviews

by headquarters and field elements to evaluate progress

against established plans. Periodic performance

management reviews of cost, scope and schedule will

be conducted with the contractor. The Department will

also define and implement a regulatory approach for the

program and conduct assessments to assure

compliance.
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

Energy Resources 21

DOE Decision Unit: Domestic Oil and Gas Supply RD&D

Presidents Budget

Program and Financing

(P&F) Accounts and

Program Activities

Decision 

Sub-Units

DOE

Office

FY 2000

Comparable Approp.

($M)

FY 2001

Request

($M)

250 Energy Programs

Fossil Energy

Research and

Development

Oil Technology* FE 57 43

Gas Technology** FE 25 32

Total 83 75

* Excludes $10 million for Ultra Clean Fuels Initiative in F2001, which is included in Clean Fuels

** Excludes $6.3 million in FY2000 and $6.5 million in FY2001 for Gas-to-Liquids, which is included in Clean Fuels. 

Introduction of the Business Unit:

The Departments Domestic Oil and Gas Supply Program operates under a single overriding goal: to ensure the

availability of competitively-priced oil and natural gas supplies to support a strong U.S. economy. The Programs

RD&D activities focus on enhancing the efficiency and environmental quality of domestic oil and natural gas

exploration, recovery, processing, transport, and storage operations. Improved technologies and information are

required to boost production of natural gas, a clean and abundant domestic fossil fuel that is an increasingly important

component of our Nations energy portfolio, and to extend the life of domestic oil reservoirs. Program efforts are also

directed to making environmental regulation cost-effective, compliance feasible, and reasonably economic, while

assuring economic access to and recovery of domestic oil and gas resources consistent with effective environmental

protection. In FY 2001funding is requested for Natural Gas Technologies for an Energy Grid Reliability Initiative, that

seeks to enhance reliability and deliverability of the Nations natural gas pipelines and gas storage facilities. 

Annual Performance Goals:

FY 1999 Results FY 2000 Target (Revised Final) FY 2001 Proposed Target

! Demonstrate four advanced

production enhancement

technologies that could

ultimately add 190 million

barrels of domestic reserves,

including 30 million barrels

during FY 1999 (ER1-1)

(EXCEEDED GOAL)

! Complete development of 1

Advanced Drilling,

Completion & Stimulation

technology system that could

contribute to an additional 6

TCF of domestic gas reserves

by 2010. (ER2-2)

(MET GOAL)

! Complete demonstration and

transfer of seven advanced

secondary and tertiary

technologies, adding 92 million

barrels of reserves, increasing the

number of economic wells and

reducing abandonment rates.

 (ER1-1)

! Demonstrate a cost effective

horizontal well and advanced

exploration and stimulation

technologies in low permeability

natural gas formations for

increasing recovery of the 5,000+

TCF of gas in place in the Greater

Green River and Wind River Basins.

 (ER2-2)

! Complete demonstration of four

advanced secondary and tertiary

technologies, increasing nearterm incremental production by

1.1 million barrels of oil, and a

long-term increase of over 2

billion barrels of oil. (ER1)

! Develop and demonstrate

technologies with near-term

commercialization potential for

detecting and quantifying areas of

high fracture density in low

permeability gas reservoirs.(ER2)
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

Energy Resources 22

FY 1999 Results FY 2000 Target (Revised Final) FY 2001 Proposed Target

! Complete an online environmental

compliance expert system,

developed in cooperation with

States, that will improve oil and gas

production economics by giving

producers on-line access to Federal

and State rules and regulations and

allowing them to conduct

environmental permitting and

reporting over the Internet,

reducing time and costs related to

environmental compliance. (ER1-1)

 (NEARLY MET GOAL)

! Complete field testing and

monitoring of two technologies

for downhole separation for oil

and water, resulting in

reduction in produced water

and potential increase in oil

production per well. (ER1-1)

! Identify a site containing gas

hydrates suitable for testing the

feasibility of methane recovery.

(ER5-2)

! Demonstrate the field application

of a shoulder mounted, portable

video methane leak detection

system that can be used to

significantly reduce costs of leak

monitoring at refineries and other

facilities while reducing harmful

air emissions. Annual savings of

$500,000 per year per refinery,

on average, would result from

regulatory acceptance and

application of this technology.

 (ER1)

! Quantify a hydrate deposit by

correlating core samples with

geophysical and well log data.

 (ER4)

Means and Strategies for FY2001:

Benefits from demonstrated technologies will be

achieved by expediting technology transfer to

producers, particularly independents, by developing

and demonstrating advanced production technologies

and conducting pilot and field-scale demonstrations of

proven laboratory technologies, and by working with

and supporting industry associations, such as the

Petroleum Technology Transfer Council, to provide

focused technology workshops, information resource

centers, and computer-based information. 

Collaboration Activities:

Field demonstrations are conducted with collaboration

of industry, academia, and others and with input from

National Laboratories. Cost-shared projects improve

chances of success and have a direct technology

transfer component. DOE is collaborating with EPA

and their Common Sense Initiative in order to

demonstrate the environmental and economic

advantages of new leak detection technology. Such a

demonstration is needed to gain regulatory approval of

this advanced technology. 

External Factors Affecting Performance:

Program results may be affected by world oil prices,

corporate mergers and acquisitions, issues related to

access to public lands, and new and evolving

environmental legislation and regulations.

Validation and Verification:

Data

Sources:

DOE fact sheets, project reports, and

published articles (i.e. technical

journals, trade press)

Baselines: Project reports. US Geological

Survey 1995 assessment of oil and

gas resources.

Frequency: Varies by project (quarterly, semiannual, annual)

Data

Storage:

Project contract files maintained at

the NETL

Verification: FE technical review of project reports

and peer review of published articles.

Planned Program Evaluation:

The program and projects contained therein will be

evaluated at a Contractor Review Workshop. National

Research Council review of gas hydrates program

accomplishments is planned on a biannual basis.
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

Energy Resources 23

DOE Decision Unit: High Efficiency, No/Low Emissions Power Systems RD&D

Presidents Budget

Program and Financing

(P&F) Accounts and

Program Activities

Decision 

Sub-Units

DOE

Office

FY 2000

Comparable Approp.

($M)

FY 2001

Request

($M)

250 Energy Programs

Fossil Energy Research

and Development

Coal and Power Systems

(C&PS)/Central Systems

FE 115 89

C&PS/Distributed Generation

Systems

FE 45 42

C&PS/Sequestration R&D FE 9 20

C&PS/Advanced Research FE 23 27

Clean Coal Technology Clean Coal Technology FE (146) (155)

Total 46 23

Description of the Program:

The primary goal for the power systems RD&D program is to develop progressively, cleaner, lower cost and higher

efficiency power systems. By 2015 the Vision 21 program is designed to develop systems which produce near-zero

level of pollutants while simultaneously reducing electricity costs by 10% to 20%. The systems would also be amenable

to carbon dioxide capture and a program is underway to develop technologies to sequester carbon dioxide emissions

either through direct capture or enhancing natural sinks. 

Annual Performance Goals:

FY 1999 Results FY 2000 Target (Revised Final) FY 2001 Proposed Target

! Initiate a coordinated

Department wide collaborative

research program to develop

lower-cost, environmentally

acceptable technology

approaches to carbon capture

and sequestration. (ER5-2)

(MET GOAL)

! Issue draft report which

identifies key research needs in

several aspects of sequestration

and select six concepts to

identify promising sequestration

options. (ER5-2)

(MET GOAL)

! Commence 3-4 small scale carbon

sequestration development projects

from those selected in the FY 1998

Novel Concepts solicitation, and

feasibility studies for 1-2

sequestration projects selected

under FEs August and September

1999 solicitations. (ER5-2)

! Demonstrate hydrogen CO2

separation from syngas to meet

the long-term goals of providing

low-cost hydrogen for highefficiency fuel cells and for

providing concentrated CO2

streams for sequestration. (ER5)
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

Energy Resources 24

FY 1999 Results FY 2000 Target (Revised Final) FY 2001 Proposed Target

! Successfully operate 100 kWe

solid oxide fuel cell for 4000

hours. (ER2-4)

(MET GOAL)

! Complete full-scale

component testing of two

advanced, utility-scale

turbines with over 60 percent

efficiency when used in

combined cycles (new plants

are currently about 55

percent) and with ultra-low

NOx emissions. Initiate

advanced gas turbine full

speed, no load testing with

one gas turbine manufacturer.

(ER2-4)

(MET GOAL)

! Complete commercial

demonstration of one

integrated gasification

combined cycle project

(Wabash) and continue

operations of two other

gasification projects in order

to establish the engineering

foundation leading to new

generation of 60 percent

efficient, ultraclean, coal

powerplants. (ER2-4)

(MET GOAL)

! Begin testing of first market

prototype solid oxide fuel cell for

distributed power applications.

(ER2-4)

! Complete validation testing for

critical components of advanced

utility-scale turbines with over 60

percent efficiency (combined cycles

mode) and ultra-low NOx emissions. 

(ER2-4)

! In support of Vision 21, complete

testing of a 250kw fuel cell/turbine

hybrid and deliver a conceptual

design of a 1-MW fuel cell/turbine

hybrid powerplant to facilitate

market entry. (ER2-4)

! Complete demonstration of the third

integrated gasification combined

cycle project (Pinion Pine) utilizing

air-blown gasification and hot gas

cleanup for improved thermal

efficiency, and continue operations of

one other project (Polk) in order to

establish the engineering foundation

leading to new generation of 60

percent efficient powerplants.

(ER2-4)

! Complete pilot studies on mercury

emission controls that augment

existing pollution control

technologies, and are expected to

reduce mercury emissions by over 50

percent at less than half the cost

originally estimated in EPA's

December 1997 report to Congress

on Mercury. (ER2-4)

! Complete the first large scale

(600MW) test of selective noncatalytic reduction, which will allow

coal-fired power plants to satisfy

ozone transport (OTAG)

requirements for reduction of

emissions of oxides of nitrogen and

also reduce fine particulate matter. 

(ER2-4)

! Begin testing of a 300Kw-1Mw

solid oxide fuel cell/turbine

hybrid commercial prototype for

distributed power applications. 

(ER2)

! For the second gas turbine 

manufacturer, initiate field test of

59% efficient (combined cycle

mode) utility-scale turbine with

advanced blades. (ER2)

! Begin demonstration of a 300MW

to 1-MW Molten Carbonate Fuel

Cell Powerplant System to verify

market entry design. (ER2)

! Complete design and initiate

construction of Advanced

Pressurized Circulating Fluidized

Bed (APCFB) demonstration

project at Lakeland, FL. (ER2)

! Complete design and continue

construction of Circulating

Atmospheric Fluidized Bed

demonstration project at

Jacksonville, FL. (ER2)

! Initiate construction of a fixedbed slagging gasification and fuel

cell demonstration project (Clean

Energy Project). (ER2)

! For carbon sequestration, expand

the number of possible costeffective, collaborative, multinational applied R&D options

carried to proof of concept

stage. Complete multiple field

experiments on promising

technologies. (ER4)

! Complete testing of a selective

non-catalytic low-cost NOx

reduction technology. (ER2)

! Begin testing of a sorbent for

controlling all forms of mercury

emissions. (ER2)

! Complete initial test of the IGCC

transport gasifier.
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

Energy Resources 25

Means and Strategies for FY 2001:

The program will continue to promote a strategy in

power systems R&D that incorporates a focused and

collaborative effort between government and industry

to achieve the environmental and economic goals of the

technologies. It will continue its dissemination of

information and data and build on government-industry

partnerships to commercialize clean coal technologies. 

For carbon sequestration, the program will continue to

strive to increase domestic and international

partnerships to complete field experiments on

promising options.

Collaboration Activities:

For carbon sequestration, FE will continue to

collaborate with the Office of Science, other parts of

DOE, and other government agencies, as appropriate, 

to meet the program goals. For all activities FE will

also work collaboratively with other government and

industry partners, and participate in the International

Energy Agency Greenhouse Gas (IEAGHG) R&D

program. Significant cost-sharing opportunities are

possible through existing and new research agreements.

External Factors Affecting Performance:

Program results may be affected by world prices for

competitive feedstocks and energy technologies, and

from new and evolving environmental regulations, or

any new legislation  in particular, related to CO2 and

air pollutants  that affect coal use. Also, industry

restructuring/deregulation issues and uncertainties will

continue to challenge coal use until the impacts on the

industry become clearer. Program results may be

particularly affected by both evolutionary and

revolutionary approaches to carbon sequestration.

Validation and Verification:

Data Sources: DOE fact sheets, project reports,

and published articles (i.e.,

technical journals, trade press)

Baselines: Project reports

Frequency: Varies by project (monthly,

quarterly, semi-annual, annual)

Data Storage: Project contract files maintained

at the FETC: Clean Coal

Compendium of Information

available at www.lanl.

gov/projects/cctc. Carbon

Sequestration Websites. 

Verification: FE technical review of project

reports and peer review of

published articles

Planned Program Evaluation:

The program and projects contained therein will be

evaluated at the Annual Contractors Meeting.
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

Energy Resources 26

DOE Decision Unit: Clean Fuels RD&D

Presidents Budget

Program and Financing

(P&F) Accounts and

Program Activities

Decision 

Sub-Units

DOE

Office

FY 2000

Comparable Approp.

($M)

FY 2001

Request

($M)

250 Energy Programs

Fossil Energy

Research and

Development

Coal and Power

Systems/Fuels

FE 20 16

Natural Gas

Technology/ Gas-toLiquids

FE 6 6

Oil Technology/ Ultra

Clean Fuels

FE 0 10

Total 26 32

Description of the Program:

The Integrated Fossil Energy Clean Fuels Program is implementing partnerships with industry to insure a stable,

affordable supply of transportation fuels capable of meeting existing as well as proposed emission requirements defined

in EPA regulations. This is being accomplished by supporting the development and deployment of innovative

technologies to provide ultra-clean burning, high performance transportation fuels from fossil energy resources. These

activities support the Departments Ultra-Clean Transportation Fuels Initiative (UCTFI). This initiative promotes, in

partnership with the refining and transportation industries, the development and deployment of technologies that will

produce ultra-clean, high performance transportation fuels for the 21st century from both petroleum and non-petroleum

sources. These will enable the introduction of advanced, highly efficient fuel/engine combinations being developed by

the Department, such as the Partnership for a New Generation of Vehicles (PNGV), which offers the promise of lower

regional emissions and greater than double the miles per gallon of fuel. In the nearer term, ultra-clean transportation

fuels can be produced from improved or new refinery upgrading technology. In the mid-to-longer term, ultra-clean

transportation fuels from natural gas, coal and other carbonaceous feedstocks would enjoy a high level of compatibility

with the existing infrastructure, and could provide environmental benefits due to their suitability for use in advanced,

high-efficiency vehicle engines. The initiative will have two components. The first component will include R&D

projects that lead to the production of sufficient quantities of fuel to validate performance and emissions -- testing that

will be done in collaboration with DOEs Office of Transportation Technologies. The second component is a

supporting research program carried out by National Laboratories and co-sponsored with the fuel industry that is focused

on the development of advanced fuel-making process components, materials, and chemistry needed for the manufacture

of ultra-clean performing transportation fuels. 
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

Energy Resources 27

Annual Performance Goals:

FY 1999 Results FY 2000 Target (Revised Final) FY 2001 Proposed Target

! Complete solicitation for, and

selection of, candidate industrial

teams for the Entry Entrance

Coproduction Plant (EECP)

project in which innovative

alternative fuels will be

coproduced along with electricity

and chemical products. (ER1-4)

! Complete operation of LaPorte

Slurry Phase Reactor for

production of advanced ultraclean fuels for engine testing.

 (ER1)

! Complete negotiations with

industrial teams selected to

implement the EECP project and

initiate Phase I of the three-phase

activity. (ER1)

! Begin laboratory scale test

operations of a novel syngas

ceramic membrane reactor to

reduce gas-to-liquid fuel

conversion costs and initiate

construction of first stage scale-up

of the reactor. (ER1)

Means and Strategies for FY 2001:

The program will continue to develop innovative

processes, in partnership with industry and other

Government organizations, for the production of ultraclean fuels required by the transportation sector in the

21st Century. These fuels will meet the proposed EPA

Tier II Transportation Vehicle Requirements, and for

feedstocks that include solid fuels, will initially be

produced in co-production facilities that will provide

fuels in sufficient quantities for large-scale fleet testing. 

The program will also accelerate process delineation

and development for ultra-clean, high performance,

gas-derived liquid motor fuel products suitable for

deployment in Alaska, the Gulf of Mexico, and other

remote sites. 

Additional activities will continue to develop

technologies to improve the environment through the

reduction and/or elimination of waste products from

coal, petroleum coke, and heavy oil utilization and/or

conversion processes and reduce the emissions of

airborne toxic emissions by removing the precursor

elements before they enter the energy

utilization/conversion process and are subsequently

discharged. 

Collaboration Activities:

Criteria essential to setting performance goals and

programmatic content are being obtained through

informational exchanges and meetings with the

Environmental Protection Agency, the Department of

Commerce, and the Department of Transportation

External Factors Affecting Performance:

Actions taken by the EPA in setting the final

requirements of the Tier II Regulations for Emissions

from Motor Vehicles and/or the transportation sector,

in conjunction with the associated schedule for their

implementation, will greatly influence the priority given

to these activities. Program results may be affected by

world prices for competitive feedstocks and energy

technologies. Finally, new and evolving environmental

regulations or any new legislation  in particular,

related to CO2 and air toxics  that affect coal use,

could have an impact.
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

Energy Resources 28

Validation and Verification:

Data Sources: DOE fact sheets, project reports,

and published articles (i.e.,

technical journals, trade press)

Baselines: Project reports

Frequency: Varies by project (monthly,

quarterly, semi-annual, annual)

Data Storage: Project contract files maintained at

the FETC: Clean Coal

Compendium of Information

available at

www.lanl.gov/projects/cctc

Verification: FE technical review of project

reports and peer review of

published articles

Planned Program Evaluation:

The program and projects contained therein will be

evaluated at the Annual Contractors Meeting.
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

Energy Resources 29

DOE Decision Unit: FE R&D Crosscutting and Special Activities

Presidents Budget

Program and Financing

(P&F) Accounts and

Program Activities

Decision 

Sub-Units

DOE

Office

FY 2000

Comparable Approp.

($M)

FY 2001

Request

($M)

250 Energy Programs

Fossil Energy

Research and

Development

Program Direction and

Management Support

FE 75 75

Plant and Capital

Equipment

FE 3 2

Environmental

Restoration

FE 10 9

Cooperative Research

and Development

FE 7 6

Fuels Programs FE 2 2

Advanced Metallurgical

Research

FE 5 5

Prior Year Offsets FE (9)

Great Plains Project

Trust (Interest) 

FE (1)

Total 103 89

Description of the Program:

This decision unit includes items that are in the overall FE R&D area but are not part of the main FE R&D business

lines. In particular:

C Program Direction and Management Support provides funding for salaries, benefits and overhead expenses for

management of the FE program at Headquarters, the Federal Energy Technology Center, and the National Petroleum

Technology Office. 

C Environmental Restoration funds activities to ensure protection of workers, the public, and the environment in

performing the FE mission at FE field facilities. 

C Cooperative R&D funds collaborative strategic research at two former FE facilities

C The Fuels Program includes management of the regulatory review of natural gas imports and exports, exports of

electricity, and the construction and operation of electricity lines that cross U.S. international borders

C Advanced Metallurgical Research carries out research concerning the extraction, processing, use and disposal of

mineral substances at the Albany Research Center in Oregon. 

These are relatively small activities in FE and thus performance measures are not included for the Annual Performance

Review (although measures are included in the budget narrative). 
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

Energy Resources 30

DOE Decision Unit: Petroleum Reserves

Presidents Budget Program

and Financing (P&F) Accounts

and Program Activities

Decision

SubUnits

DOE

Office

FY 2000

Comparable Approp.

($M)

FY 2001

Request

($M)

250 Energy Programs

Strategic Petroleum Reserve - FE 158 158

SPR Petroleum Account (7)

Naval Petroleum and Oil Shale 0

Elk Hills School Lands Fund 36

Total 158 187

Introduction of the Decision Unit:

Petroleum Reserves includes the Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR) and the Naval Petroleum and Oil Shale Reserves

(NPOSR). The SPR ensures and maintains the readiness capability to drawdown and distribute crude oil from the SPR

inventory to commercial distribution systems in order to protect the domestic U.S. economy from the impact of energy

supply disruptions. SPR executes U.S. obligations to act cooperatively with member nations of the International Energy

Agency (IEA) to deter or respond to supply disruptions which would adversely affect member nations. The NPOSR,

following the sale of Elk Hills, its primary asset, to the private sector in February 1998, continues to manage, operate,

maintain and produce three properties remaining under its jurisdiction. The program is relatively small, and no

performance measures are included in the Performance Plan. Also included is the Elk Hills School Lands Fund, which

was established to settle certain Elk Hills related lands claims with the State of California.

Annual Performance Goals:

FY 1999 Results FY 2000 Target (Revised Final) FY 2001 Proposed Target

! Initiate additional SPR

infrastructure Life Extension

Program projects, thereby

bringing program

implementation to

approximately 96% of the $328

million program. Program

completion in FY 2000 will

increase sustained drawdown

capability to 4.1 million barrels

per day, compared to 3.7 in

FY 1997. 

 (ER1-2)

 (MET GOAL)

! Complete the Life Extension

Program to ensure the long-term

reliability, effectiveness, and

operational readiness of SPR

facilities and systems. (ER1-2)

! Ensure the achievement of a

calculated site availability of 95% or

greater with drawdown capability of

4.1 million barrels per day for a

sustained 90 day period within 15

days notice by the President. (ER1-2)

! Complete contracting for the transfer

and/or exchange of 28 million

barrels of Federal Royalty Oil from

the Department of the Interior for a

net increase of approximately 23

million barrels in SPR inventory,

with deliveries of a remaining 4

million barrels in FY 2001. (ER1-2)

! Ensure achievement of a

calculated site availability of

95% or greater with drawdown 

capability of 4.1 million barrels 

per day for a sustained 90 day 

period within 15 days notice by

the President. (ER1)

! Continue the transfer of Federal

Royalty Oil to SPR at a net rate

of 25 million barrels per year

until inventory reaches 700

million barrels. (ER1)
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

Energy Resources 31

Means and Strategies for FY2001:

SPR will continue its mission to maintain the

operational readiness of SPR facilities to draw down oil

within 15 days of notice by the President at set

performance levels. Assurance of this readiness

posture will be accomplished through internal readiness

reviews, assessments, exercises and tests. 

Effectiveness of the SPR to mitigate the economic

damage of severe oil supply disruptions on the

economy will be influenced by the SPRs size

(inventory and capacity) and ability to deliver into the

marketplace. Department has attempted several

strategies over the years (direct purchase and storage

service agreements with public, private and foreign

entities) to acquire oil to complete SPR fill. Current

Departmental agreement with the Interior Department

during FY 1999 provides for using 28 million barrels of

Federal Royalty Oil to help fill the SPR. The

agreement will add an estimated 27 million barrels of

crude oil to the SPR. A continuation of the transfer

could add additional oil to the SPR inventory each

fiscal year until the 700 million barrel capacity is filled. 

Collaboration Activities:

DOE coordinates its activities for the SPR with the

White House National Economic Council and the

Departments of the Interior and Treasury as a member

of the Interagency Working Group on Oil and Gas.

Acquisition of oil through Federal royalty-in-kind oil

leases is being coordinated with Interior Departments

Minerals Management Service. SPR is conducting an

interagency size study with OMB, the Council of

Economic Advisors, Treasury and the CIA to determine

an Administration policy on optimal SPR size and oil

acquisition strategy.

External Factors Affecting Performance:

Performance can be affected by petroleum market

conditions and developments in the commercial

distribution system (i.e. pipelines, terminals). 

Continuing royalty-in-kind transfers during FY 2001, in

addition to those per the FY 1999 agreement, will be

contingent on future successful negotiations with

Department of the Interior.

Validation and Verification:

Data Sources: Operations status reports, project

assessment reports, and project and

program reviews. Energy Information

Administration (EIA) oil industry

databases.

Baselines: Technical project baselines,

Operational Readiness performance

criteria, SPR annual Performance Plan,

contractor annual operating and work

authorization plans, and budget

baseline.

Frequency: Daily operational status reports,

monthly project reviews and quarterly

program reviews. Annual and monthly 

EIA data sources. 

Data Storage: Operations and facilities management

data is maintained at SPR field office. 

This includes project assessment and 

M&O contractor performance data. 

Program policy analysis and initiatives,

legislative guidance, and oil industry

research data is maintained at the

Headquarters SPR Program Office.

Verification: Combination of daily field and

Headquarters staff interaction, monthly

and quarterly reporting/reviews, and

online access to performance data

provides a continuous means

throughout the fiscal year to verify

and validate performance data. 

Planned Program Evaluation:

Monthly project reviews and quarterly program

reviews, conducted by Federal and contractor personnel

of the SPR, provide an important means for evaluating

progress against program plans like the SPR Annual

Performance Plan and scheduled project management

activity. Budget formulation/execution assessments are

regularly conducted throughout the year, including

annual budget validations. Other evaluations include:

semiannual M&O contractor award fee performance

assessments against Work Authorization Directives;

on-site reviews each year to verify operational,

maintenance and management performance data; and,

Drawdown Readiness quarterly reviews.
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

Energy Resources 32

Annual Energy Savings from BTS Teams

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2010

Trillion Btu

Equipment

Commercial

Residential

120

DOE Decision Unit: Building Technology, State and Community Programs

Presidents Budget

Program and Financing

(P&F) Accounts and

Program Activities

Decision 

Sub-Unit

DOE

Office

FY 2000

Comparable

Approp.

($M)

FY 2001

Request

($M)

250 Energy Programs

Building Technology,

State and Community

Programs--non-grant

BTSnon-grant EE 116 149

Building Technology,

State and Community

Programs--grant

BTSgrant EE 169 191

Total 284 340

Introduction of the Decision Unit:

In partnership with industry and government, the Office of Building Technology, State and Community Programs (BTS)

develops, promotes, and integrates energy technologies and practices to make buildings more efficient and affordable

and communities more livable.

Annual Performance Goals:

Discussion: The longer-term BTS goal is to reduce

annual energy consumption by 2 quadrillion btu by the

year 2010, relative to what would have otherwise been

consumed. The 2001 goal is to reduce annual energy

consumption by 120 trillion btu. For comparison

purposes, 100 trillion btu is the amount of energy

required to power half a million households at 1998's

rate of usage. Energy savings will occur in residential

buildings, commercial buildings and equipment. This

goal supports DOE strategic objective ER3.
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

Energy Resources 33

Annual Performance Goals:

FY 1999 Results FY 2000 Target (Revised Final) FY 2001 Proposed Target

! Weatherize 67,845 homes,

bringing the total number of

homes weathered to 4.7

million. (ER3-3)

(EXCEEDED GOAL)

! Work with the Federal Trade

Commission to allow

manufacturers to add the

ENERGY STAR logo to the

yellow and black FTC

Energy Guide labor for

covered products and recruit

an additional 1,500 stores to

market ENERGY STAR

appliances nationwide.

(ER3-3)

(EXCEEDED GOAL)

! Recruit 55 additional Rebuild

America partnerships. New

partners will begin action

plans that will result in over

250 million square feet of

floor space renovated, reduce

annual energy costs by over

$90 million and reduce annual

carbon emissions by 0.22

million metric tons. (ER3-3) 

(MET GOAL)

! Weatherize 68,000 homes, bringing

the total number of homes

weatherized to 4.8 million. (ER3-3)

! Recruit 5 utility partners to promote

ENERGY STAR products; an

additional 500 retail stores to

promote Energy Star products; and

40 window partners to promote

Energy Star Windows. (ER3-3)

! Recruit 50 new Rebuild America

Partners, increasing the total

number of Rebuild America

communities to 290. New partners

will begin action plans that will

result in over 100 million square feet

of floor space renovated, reducing

annual energy costs by $28 million

and reducing CO2 emissions by 100

thousand metric tons when local

actions are completed in 2003.

(ER3-3)

! Issue final rules regarding energy

efficiency standards for flourescent

lamp ballasts and water heaters and

issue proposed rules regarding

energy efficiency standards for

clothes washers and central air

conditioners. (ER3-3)

! Weatherize 74,800 homes,

bringing the total number of

homes weatherized to 4.9 million.

(ER3)

! Recruit 500 new ENERGY STAR

partners, bringing the total

number of stores marketing

ENERGY STAR appliances up to

5,000. (ER3)

! Recruit 50 new Rebuild America

partners, increasing the total

number of rebuild America

communities to 340. (ER3) 

! Publish ANOPR concerning

standards for commercial HVAC

and water heaters, and

distributed transformers.(ER3) 

 
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

Energy Resources 34

FY 1999 Results FY 2000 Target (Revised Final) FY 2001 Proposed Target

! Complete 100 homes that are

over 50 percent more efficient

than typical homes through the

Building America program,

bringing the total number of

homes completed to 700, add five

new community scale projects for

building 1000 additional homes

in FY2000, and transfer research

recommendations to the

Partnership for Advancing

Technology in Housing (PATH). 

(ER3-3) 

 (EXCEEDED GOAL)

! In partnership with Building

America, develop more than

2,000 highly energy-efficient,

environmentally sound, and costeffective houses and disseminate

results to builders of 15,000 other

houses through Partnership for

Advanced Technology in Housing

(PATH). (ER3-3)

! With Building America Partners,

complete 3,000 energy efficient

environmentally sound high

performance homes. (ER3)

Means and Strategies for FY2001:

Savings in residential buildings will be realized through

research and development focusing on integrating

design and equipment; residential building codes;

weatherization assistance; contributions to the

Partnership for Advancing Technology in Housing

(PATH); and community energy programs.

Savings in commercial buildings will be realized

through research and development targeted towards

design, operation, and maintenance of energy-efficient

commercial buildings; commercial building codes; state

energy grants; and all community energy programs.

Equipment savings will be realized through research on

building materials (e.g., roofs, walls, windows) and

equipment, lighting, appliances, and the development

and implementation of appliance and equipment

standards; and promotion of Energy Star buildings.

Collaboration Activities:

BTS collaborates with the Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA) and Department of Housing and Urban

Development (HUD), buildings industries, state and

local governments and organizations and the National

Laboratories in efforts to promote the use of efficiency

technologies and practices, in part through the greater

involvement of the buildings community in research,

development and deployment activities.

External Factors Affecting Performance:

Numerous factors may impact achievement of BTS

goals, including program funding, the state of the

economy, energy prices, consumer choice, regional

disparities, and overall structural change in the

buildings market. The energy savings goal assumes a

robust construction market to generate the demand for

new, energy efficient housing and commercial space, as

well as demand for remodeling and commercial

retrofits to replace aging and relatively inefficient

equipment.

Characteristics of new construction that would tend to

increase energy consumption in residential buildings

would be larger homes, more construction in temperate

climates, and an increase in tele commuting. Increased

electrification (more computers, printers, fax machines)

and shifts in the relative mix of commercial buildings

(e.g., hospitals versus office buildings) can contribute

to a rise in energy use and intensity in the commercial

sector.

Validation and Verification:

Data Sources: EIA Annual Energy Review (AER);

Commercial Building Energy

Consumption Survey (CBECS);

Residential Energy Consumption

Survey (RECS); and Annual Energy

Outlook (AEO). US DOC Current

Industrial Reports (CIR). Various

trade publications. Information

collected directly from BTS

performer or partner.
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

Energy Resources 35

Baselines: Energy savings are based on market

penetration of technologies after the

year 2000. Savings are relative to

what energy consumption would

have been in the absence of this

market penetration.

Frequency: Complete revalidation of

assumptions and results can only

take place every 3-4 years due to the

reporting cycle of two critical

publications CBECS and RECS. 

However, annual updates of most of

the baseline forecast and on BTS

program outputs will be undertaken

annually.

Data Storage: EIA and DOC data sources are

publicly available. Trade

publications are available on a

subscription basis. BTS program

output information is contained in

various reports and memoranda.

Verification: Calculations are based on

assumptions of future market status,

equipment or technology

performance, and market penetration

rates. These assumptions can be

verified against actual performance

through technical reports, market

surveys, and product shipments.

Planned Program Evaluation:

Each year, all programs will be evaluated as to progress

towards stated goals and objectives, in terms of

milestones accomplished. More in-depth evaluations

will be performed on selected programs on a rotating

basis. These analyses will gauge actual performance of

technology or practice in the field and the extent of

energy savings based on this performance and rate of

adoption.
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

Energy Resources 36

Progress Toward Federal Site Energy Efficiency 

Goals

90,000

100,000

110,000

120,000

130,000

140,000

150,000

85 87 89 91 93 95 97 99 01 03 05 07 09

FISCAL YEAR

Btu per Gross Square Foot

10% Goal - 1995

20% Goal - 2000

30% Goal - 2005

Actual Energy Use

19.6% Reduction, 

1998

35% Goal - 2010

DOE Decision Unit: Energy Management

Presidents Budget

Program and Financing

(P&F) Accounts and

Program Activities

Decision 

Unit

DOE

Office

FY 2000

Comparable Approp.

($M)

FY 2001

Request

($M)

250 Energy Programs

Federal Energy

Management Program

Federal Energy Management EE 24 30

Solar and Renewable

Energy

Departmental Energy

Management

EE 5

Total 24 35

Introduction of the Decision Unit:

The mission of the Federal Energy Management Program (FEMP) is to reduce the use and cost of energy in the Federal

sector by advancing energy efficiency, water conservation, and the use of solar and other renewable energy sources. 

FEMP accomplishes its mission by leveraging both Federal and private resources to provide technical and financial

assistance to other Federal agencies, which take actions and make investments that increase energy efficiency and

renewable energy utilization, and reduce water consumption in their buildings, facilities and operations.

Annual Performance Goals:

Discussion: The Federal Government has established

the goal of increasing energy efficiency in Federal

buildings by 20% by 2000 and by 35% by 2010,

relative to 1985. The Federal Government has

virtually achieved its 2000 goal, improving energy

efficiency from 1985 to 1998 by 19.6%. The goal for

2001 is to achieve a 22% improvement in energy

efficiency relative to 1985. 

Executive Order 13123 established goals for efficiency

improvement in Federal industrial and laboratory

facilities of 20% in 2005, and 25% by 2010 from a

1990 baseline. Methods for measurement of these

goals will be determined in FY 2000. 

The Federal Government also has the goal of

increasing renewable energy use at federal facilities

and buildings. Specific targets for 2001, 2005 and

2010 will be established in FY2000. 

Executive Order 13123 established a goal of reducing

greenhouse gas emissions attributable to Federal

buildings energy use by 30% by 2010 from a 1990

baseline, through cost-effective energy efficiency

 improvement. Methods of, and guidance for

calculating progress against this goal will be

established in FY 2000.

These goals support DOE strategic objectives ER2 and

ER3. 
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

Energy Resources 37

Annual Performance Goals:

FY 1999 Results FY 2000 Target (Revised Final) FY 2001 Proposed Target

! Complete three nationwide solar

technology Super-Energy Savings

Performance Contracts (Super

ESPCs) for use by all agencies. 

(ER2-3)

(BELOW EXPECTATION)

! Complete one nationwide

technology Super-Energy Savings

Performance Contract (ESPC)

for use by all agencies, bringing

the total number of technology

Super-ESPCs to four. (ER2-3)

! Continue efforts to reduce the use

of energy in Federal buildings

and report the results achieved

through the end of FY 1998,

towards the goal of achieving a

20 percent reduction by the end of

FY 2000 as compared to 1985

energy use. Preliminary data

indicates that agencies had

achieved a 17 percent reduction

at the end of FY 1997. (ER3-3)

! Complete one nationwide

technology Super Energy Savings

Performance Contract (ESPC)

for use by all agencies, bringing

the total number of technology

Super ESPCs to four. (ER3)

! Continue efforts to reduce the use

of energy in Federal buildings

and report the results achieved

through the end of FY 1999,

towards the goal of achieving a

22 percent reduction by the end of

FY 2001 as compared to 1985

energy use. Preliminary data

indicates that agencies had

achieved a 17 percent reduction

at the end of FY 1997. (ER3)

Means and Strategies for FY2001:

FEMP will achieve the above goals through three

strategies: Project Financing, which focuses on

developing, and helping agencies to implement

alternative methods of financing projects; Technical

Guidance and Assistance, which aims to transfer to

Federal agencies the knowledge and expertise required

to make sound efficiency and renewable energy

technology investment choices; and, Interagency

Coordination which establishes and promotes the

existence of a Federal energy management, policy and

regulatory infrastructure necessary for consistent.

Collaboration Activities:

FEMP collaborates with states, local governments,

utilities and energy service companies (ESCOs),

associations, and other private sector organizations. 

FEMP collaborates with other agencies on specific

efficiency and renewable energy projects as an integral

part of program delivery strategy. FEMP also

collaborates with EPA on energy efficient procurement

through coordination with the DOE-EPA Energy Star

program.

External Factors Affecting Performance:

Reliance on private sector financing for Federal

efficiency exposes program to risks inherent in business

cycle, such as energy price decline (utility industry

restructuring) and interest rate increases, which

potentially impact the cost and extent of efficiency

improvements and advanced technology adoption. 

Environmental policies and regulatory actions influence

energy management decision making, both positively

and negatively. The size and composition of the

Federal building stock is outside the control of the

program; inefficient growth can adversely impact goal

achievement and environmental performance.

Validation and Verification:

Data Sources: Annual reports from agencies on

energy use, cost, gross square

footage, exempt facilities. Annual

reports are supplemented by FEMP

program specific tracking &

reporting. 

Baselines: Federal energy management goals

are measured from 1985 and 1990

levels. Goals are expressed in BTU

per gross square foot, and are not

normalized for other factors.

Frequency: Annual
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

Energy Resources 38

Data Storage: FEMP maintains a database of

reported information. Agencies

maintain their own, more detailed,

data.

Verification: No third party verification. 

Reporting anomalies are identified

and resolved during annual

reporting cycle.

Planned Program Evaluation:

Although no formal program evaluations are planned,

FEMP has built in performance feedback into its

program execution. FEMP regularly conducts customer

feedback surveys for its training and technical

assistance activities. Regular meetings are held with

agencies, utilities and ESCOs to receive feedback and

to work on improved performance. FEMP is

conducting operational planning activities and is

identifying process improvement opportunities to

reduce costs, improve timeliness of program delivery,

and to raise customer satisfaction levels.
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

Energy Resources 39

Cumulative Number of Technologies Commercialized

144

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

1987 1989 1991 1993 1995 1997 1999 2001

Industrial Energy Intensity

(1990 = 1.00)

0.60

0.65

0.70

0.75

0.80

0.85

0.90

0.95

1.00

1.05

1990 1995 2000 2005 2010

Actual Energy Intensity

25% Goal in 2010

10% Reduction through 1997

Cumulative Energy Savings from

Technology Access and Deployment Programs

0

400

800

1200

1600

2000

2400

2800

3200

1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 (P) 2000 (P) 2002 (P)

Trillion Btu

Technology Deployment

IAC and Best Practices Programs

DOE Decision Unit: Industry Sector

Presidents Budget Program

and Financing (P&F) Accounts

and Program Activities

Decision 

Sub-Units

DOE

Office

FY 2000

Comparable Approp.

($M)

FY 2001

Request

($M)

250 Energy Programs

Industry Sector - EE 175 184

Introduction of the Decision Unit:

The mission of the Office of Industrial Technologies (OIT) is to improve the energy efficiency, environmental

performance, and productivity of energy-intensive industries by rapidly developing and delivering advanced science and

technology options which will: 1) lower raw material and depletable energy use per unit output; 2) improve labor and

capital productivity; and 3) reduce the generation of wastes and pollutants.

Annual Performance Goals:

Discussion: The Departments longer-term goal is to

reduce industrial energy intensity (energy consumption

per dollar of output) to 25% below its 1990 level. By

1997 industrial energy intensity was 10% below 1990

levels, which is on track for the 14% target for 2001. 

Annual energy savings from OIT-developed

technologies is estimated to be 170 TBtu in 2001, for a

cumulative savings of 1590 TBtu. Annual energy

savings from the Industrial Assessment Center (IAC)

and best practices programs will be 90 TBtu in 2001,

for a cumulative savings of 917 TBtu. Ten OIT

technologies will be commercialized in 2001, bringing

the total number of commercialized technologies to

144. These goals support DOE strategic objectives

ER2 and ER3.
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

Energy Resources 40

Annual Performance Goals:

FY 1999 Results FY 2000 Target (Revised Final) FY 2001 Proposed Target

! Complete roadmaps for six of

the major energy intensive

industries to achieve each

industry vision and start

implementing the resulting

R&D to achieve up to 25

percent reduction of energy

consumption by 2010. 

 (ER3-2)

(MET GOAL)

! Continue support for

Industrial Assessment Centers

operating at 30 participating

universities that will conduct

approximately 750 combined

energy, waste and productivity

assessments. (ER3-2)

(MET GOAL)

! Initiate the 8,000 hour test of

the gas turbine engine for the

Advanced Turbine System for

use in industrial cogeneration.

(ER2-9)

(MET GOAL)

! Initiate 12 solicitations with

industry in support of the

roadmaps developed in the

Industries of the Future program..

(ER3-2)

! Continue support for Industrial

Assessment Centers operating at

30 participating universities that

will conduct approximately 750

combined energy, waste, and

productivity assessments.(ER3-2)

! Establish partnerships with 50

Industries of the Future plants to

provide integrated delivery of

tools and technical assistance to

target motors, steam, compressed

air, and combined heat and power

system opportunities. (ER3-2)

! Demonstrate two advanced

industrial turbine system engines

at end-user sites. (ER2-9)

! One new solicitation will be issued

in FY 2001 targeted to the

Renewables Vision 2020 for

Agriculture in support of the goals of

the Presidents Bio-based Products

and Bio-energy initiative. (ER3)

! Continue support for Industrial

Assessment Centers operating at 30

participating universities that will

conduct approximately 750

combined energy waste and

productivity assessments. (ER3) 

! Complete 15 Assessments on 5 case

studies of major industrial plants

that will document for a variety of

system-focused implemented actions. 

These will influence replication of

similar energy savings for other

plants. (ER3) 

! Complete 5000 hour durability ,

performance and emissions testing

of the Mercury 50 advanced turbine

System engine . (ER2) 

Means and Strategies for FY2001:

The above goals will be achieved by developing

technologies with applications in specific industries and

across industries. Strategies for specific industries

include: In the agriculture industry, increasing the

percentage of basic chemical building blocks derived

from plant/crop-based renewables. Reducing unit

energy consumption for primary and secondary

aluminum production. Reducing energy consumption

per pound of chemicals produced. Moving the forest

products industry to being a net producer of electricity. 

Reducing energy requirements for glass melting.

Increasing yield, reducing scrap, and improving melting

efficiency in the metal casting industry. Reducing the

amount of energy used to crush rock in the mining

industry. Improving the efficiency of petroleum

refining. In the steel industry, improving sensing and

controls of the major energy intensive unit processes,

and reducing the use of virgin raw materials. 

Strategies for developing technologies that cut across

industries include: Developing advanced industrial

materials such as intermetallic alloys. Increasing

ceramic application survival and material strength. 

Reducing boiler, burner and heater/furnace specific fuel

consumption. Commercializing sensors and controls. 

Improving the efficiencies of advanced turbines,

microturbines, and reciprocating engines. 
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

Energy Resources 41

Financial and technical assistance will also help

achieve the goals. Financial assistance through the

NICE3 and Inventions and Innovations programs will

increase the number of technologies in the marketplace. 

Technical assistance and training will be provided

through the university based Industrial Assessment

Center program. Industry adoption of best available

technologies and services will be accelerated through

the best practices program. 

Collaboration Activities:

The Department collaborates on its RD&D with the

industries identified above and with universities. The

Department also collaborates with other government

agencies including the National Aeronautics and Space

Administration (NASA), the National Science

Foundation (NSF), and the Departments of Defense

(DOD), Commerce (DOC), Agriculture (USDA), and

Interior (DOI).

External Factors Affecting Performance:

Performance will be affected by the state of the

economy. If the economy grows 50% slower than is

projected then energy intensity in 2010 is estimated to

be only 16% below 1990 levels. Performance will also

be affected by the varying growth across industries and

the value of each industrys output.

Validation and Verification:

Data

Sources:

Energy intensity is calculated from

the Energy Information

Administrations (EIAs)

Manufacturing Energy Consumption

Survey and Department of Commerce

data. The number of technologies and

their energy savings is ascertained

through interviews with technology

developers and suppliers. Energy

savings for the IAC and challenge

programs are estimated.

Baselines: Industrial energy intensity: 1990.

Energy savings and commercialized

technologies: 1976.

Frequency: Data for energy intensity is collected

once every 4 years. Annual estimates

can be made based upon data from

Department of Commerce annual

surveys. Data on energy savings and

technologies commercialized are

collected annually.

Data

Storage:

Energy intensity information is

contained on EIAs computers. Data

on energy savings and technologies

commercialized are stored in OITs

Impacts Database.

Verification: EIA quality control and outside peer

review of the Manufacturing Energy

Consumption Survey. Data on energy

savings and technologies

commercialized are reviewed by

industry representatives.

Planned Program Evaluation:

Annual program and portfolio reviews are conducted

by the individual programs. Vision and roadmaps in

three areas will be evaluated by the RAND

Corporation. The National Academy of Sciences will

be looking at mining opportunities for the future.
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

Energy Resources 42

Vehicles on the Road with Light-Weight Materials

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

7,000

8,000

9,000

10,000

1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010

Thousands of Vehicles

220,000 Vehicles in 2001

New Light Vehicle MPG Gains Due to Programs

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010

MPG Gains

Domestic Cellulosic Ethanol Production

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010

million gallons per year (gge)

6 million gallons produced in 2001

DOE Decision Unit: Transportation Sector

Presidents Budget Program and

Financing (P&F) Accounts and

Program Activities

Decision 

Unit

DOE

Office

FY 2000

Comparable Approp.

($M)

FY 2001

Request

($M)

250 Energy Programs 

270 Energy Supply

Transportation Sector Transportation

Sector

EE 233 251

Solar and Renewable Energy EE 39 55

Total 272 305

Introduction of the Decision Unit:

The mission of the Transportation sector is to support the development and use of advanced transportation vehicles and

fuels which will reduce energy demand, particularly petroleum; reduce criteria pollutant and greenhouse gas emissions;

and enable the United States transportation to sustain a strong competitive position in domestic and world markets.

Annual Performance Goals:

Discussion: The Departments goals for 2010 are to

increase the fuel efficiency of new light vehicles by 5.4

mpg, to have 10 million vehicles on the road with light

weight materials, and to increase cellulosic ethanol

production to 2200 million gallons per year. In 2001,

220,000 vehicles will contain light weight materials,

and 6 million gallons of cellulosic ethanol will be

produced. Fuel efficiency gains will begin in 2002. 

These goals support DOE strategic objectives ER1 and

ER2.
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

Energy Resources 43

Annual Performance Goals:

FY 1999 Results FY 2000 Target (Revised Final) FY 2001 Proposed Target

! Expand the Clean Cities

program to create continuous

corridors of alternative

transportation fuel availability

in and between 10 major

urban centers. (ER1-4) 

 (MET GOAL)

! Support an industrial partner

to complete site preparation

and begin construction of

industry-owned facility to

demonstrate first-of-a-kind

cellulosic biomass to ethanol

technology from agricultural

crop waste. (ER1-4)

(NEARLY MET GOAL)

! Build a single cylinder proofof-concept diesel engine that

delivers up to 55 percent

efficiency. (ER1-4)

 (NEARLY MET GOAL)

! By September 1999, in

cooperation with industry and

other federal agencies,

develop a direct injection

power system technical

roadmap and a fuel cell power

system technical roadmap to

integrate fuels and lubricants

research and development

with development of engine

and emissions treatment

technologies. (ER3-1)

 (MET GOAL)

! Demonstrate conversion of

agricultural wastes to ethanol at a

small commercial scale using a

genetically engineered

fermentative microorganism.

(ER1-4)

! Complete testing of baseline

prototype, 50-volt high power

lithium-ion modules for use in

hybrid vehicles. (ER1-4)

! Launch two projects that will lead

to 100 percent penetration of

alternative fuel vehicles in

selected niche applications such

as a local taxi fleet or the busses

for a particular school. (ER1-4)

! Work with three domestic

automakers to incorporate the

most promising Partnership for a

New Generation of Vehicles

(PNGV) technologies in concept

vehicles with up to three times

average fuel economy of 1993

Taurus, Lumina and Concorde

models. (ER3-1)

! Conduct competitive solicitation and

select at least one partner for

demonstrating the conversion of

cellulosic feedstock at a corn ethanol

plant. (ER1)

! Complete development of the 200-

volt battery aimed at satisfying the

PNGV high power energy storage

requirements of hybrid vehicles.

(ER1)

! Support the annual acquisition on

12,000 alternative fuel vehicles in

the Federal Fleet. (ER1) 

! Complete test and evaluation of a

fuel-flexible 50 KW integrated

fuelcell power system. (ER3) 
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

Energy Resources 44

Means and Strategies for FY2001:

Fuel efficiency gains will be achieved through the

introduction of lightweight materials and more efficient

technologies. The use of lightweight materials such as

aluminum sheets and composites will be made more

economically attractive through DOE research and

development efforts that reduce their costs. Vehicles

with lightweight materials include electric, hybrid, and

fuel cell vehicles. The penetration of these vehicles in

the marketplace will be enhanced by DOE R&D that:

reduces high power battery costs and battery calendar

life for hybrid vehicles; decreases battery cost and

increases battery specific energy for electric vehicles;

and reduces the cost of fuel cell systems. The

production of cellulosic ethanol will be enhanced by

DOE R&D that increases cellulose enzyme

development and reduces the cost of producing

cellulosic ethanol.

Collaboration Activities:

The Office of Transportation Technologies collaborates

with the Big Three automakers, ethanol producers, and

universities in its R&D efforts. It also collaborates with

the Department of Commerce, Department of

Transportation, the Environmental Protection Agency

and other federal agencies on the PNGV and other

programs.

External Factors Affecting Performance:

Performance will be affected by the state of the

economy, willingness of automakers to incorporate

R&D advances into vehicles, and the continuation of

the ethanol tax credit.

Validation and Verification:

Data Sources: Department of

Transportation/National Highway

Safety Administration,

Environmental Protection Agency,

laboratory tests.

Baselines: Fuel efficiency (mpg) gains are

measured from 2001.

Vehicles with lightweight materials

and ethanol production are

measured annually.

Frequency: Annual.

Data Storage: Office of Transportation

Technologies (OTT) Quality

Metrics report. Program analysis

methodology document is prepared

each year and put on the OTT

website for comment and review.

Verification: Review by Arthur D. Little. 

Presented to professionals for

comment.

Planned Program Evaluation:

The National Research Council reviews the PNGV

program each year and makes recommendations. 

Arthur D. Little reviews several programs each year.
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

2 DOE Strategic Plan Objective 5-1 calls for The average number of unique monthly users of the Energy Resources Board Web Sites will

grow at least 20 percent per year through 2003 (from about 70,000/month in 1997). [Emphasis Added] The information provided is for EIA

only and does not include information from http://www.eren.doe.gov in order for the information to match the decision unit shown.

Energy Resources 45

Average Number of Unique Monthly Users 

(Thousands)

71.5

117.7

149.1

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

1997 1998 1999

Calendar Year

DOE Decision Unit: Energy Information Administration

Presidents Budget Program and

Financing (P&F) Accounts and

Program Activities

Decision 

Sub-Units

DOE

Office

FY 2000

Comparable Approp.

($M)

FY 2001

Request

($M)

270 Energy Supply

Energy Information Administration - EI 72 75

Introduction of the Decision Unit:

As an independent statistical/analytical agency, EIA has two principal roles. First, its primary responsibility is to

conduct the functions required by statute. This responsibility consists of the development and maintenance of a

comprehensive energy database and the publication of reports and analyses for a wide variety of customers in the public

and private sectors. There are also specific reports which are required by law. Second, EIA responds to inquiries for

energy information. The primary customers of EIA services are public policymakers in the Department of Energy and

the Congress. Other customers include other agencies within the Executive branch and the independent agencies of the

Federal Government, state and local governments, the energy industry, educational institutions, the news media, and the

public.

Annual Performance Goals:

Discussion2

: In 1997 EIA, in cooperation with EE, committed to increasing the average number of unique monthly

users of its web site by 20% annually, from a baseline of 70,000. In 1997, EIA average 71,500 unique monthly users of

its web site, slightly higher than the agreed upon baseline. In the following year, EIA averaged 117,700 unique monthly

users, an increase of over 55% from the 1997 average. During the period January through June 1999, EIA is averaging

over 149,000 unique monthly users of its web site  an increase of over 20%.
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

Energy Resources 46

Annual Performance Goals:

FY 1999 Results FY 2000 Target (Revised Final) FY 2001 Proposed Target

! Publish domestic and

international Annual Energy

Outlooks forecasting energy

supply and consumption through

the year 2020. (ER5-1)

 (MET GOAL)

! Achieve a growth rate of at least

20 percent per year in the

average number of unique

monthly users of the Energy

Resources Board Web Site (from

about 71,000 per month in

1997). (ER5-1)

 (EXCEEDED GOAL)

! Achieve a growth rate of at least

20 percent per year, through 2002,

in the average number of unique

monthly users of the Energy

Resources Board Web Site (from

about 71,000 per month in 1997).

(ER5-1)

! Publish domestic and international

Annual Energy Outlooks

forecasting energy supply and

consumption through the year

2020. (ER5-1)

! Publish domestic and

international Annual Energy

Outlooks forecasting energy

supply and consumption through

the year 2020. (ER 4)

! Achieve a growth rate of at least

20 percent per year in the

average number of unique

monthly users of the Energy

Resources Board Web Site (from

about 71,000 per month in 1997).

(ER 4)

Means and Strategies for FY2001:

In FY 2001, EIA's program will consist of data

collection necessary to fulfill its statutory requirement

for the maintenance of a comprehensive energy

database, the publication of reports and analyses for a

wide variety of customers in the public and private

sectors, the maintenance of the National Energy

Modeling System for mid-term energy markets analysis

and forecasting, the maintenance of the Short-Term

Integrated Forecasting System for near-term energy

market analysis and forecasting, customer forums and

surveys to maintain an up-to-date product and service

mix. EIAs strategy is to make its broad mix of

products and services available to its customers

through the continued use of publications and an

expansion of electronic information dissemination via

the EIA web site, ListServ, and CD-ROM.

Collaboration Activities:

EIA has a number of different collaborative activities

underway with statistical agencies from other cabinet

agencies. The most important collaboration is via the

Interagency Council on Statistical Policy (ICSP),

composed of the heads of the major statistical agencies

and chaired by the Office of Management and Budget's

Chief Statistician. The ICSP has supported a number

of collaborative activities including: Fedstats-a website

providing data from the major statistical agencies in a

user-friendly environment; the NSF Digital

Government initiative providing funds to researchers to

interact with consortiums of statistical agencies on

issues related to data dissemination, presentation and

collection of large-scale databases on the web; the Joint

Program in Survey Methodology (JPSM) -- to train

college graduates in applied survey methodology,

initiate a summer intern program and develop other

certification alternatives. ICSP is backing the data

sharing legislation that would allow the agencies to

share data and sampling lists and still protect the

confidentiality of respondents.

The longest standing collaboration is through our

membership on the Federal Committee on Statistical

Methodology, a consortium of government experts,

appointed from within the statistical agencies for their

technical abilities. The FCSM undertakes studies of

methodological issues, sponsors conferences for

sharing ideas, problems and research.

Still another example of collaboration is through the

Interagency Confidentiality and Data Access Group, a

special interest group of FCSM, that deals with the

confidentiality, privacy and disclosure protection. The

group collaborated and pooled funds to create a user

interface to a census disclosure program. The program

is now readily available on the web. Individual

agencies have provided funds to support the

development of an auditing program for tabular data

that will also be made widely available on the web.

External Factors Affecting Performance:

EIAs data and analyses are anticipated to become more

visible and critical over the next several years, because:

(1) the debate on greenhouse gas emissions and global

warming potential will cause the United States, as well
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

Energy Resources 47

as other countries, to assess and understand the impact

from major sources of emissions generated by human

activity, and (2) with the restructuring and deregulation

of the electric and natural gas industries, energy use

and price data, especially at the consumers level, are

much more difficult to obtain from suppliers. This type

of information will be especially useful to State

governments, who are currently working with EIA and

increasingly rely on EIA data to understand and

effectively manage the current and emerging effects of

energy industry restructurings impact on consumers in

their State.

Partly as a result of this increasing visibility and

importance, it is critical to maintain the quality of the

data from EIAs surveys. EIA will face an

unprecedented challenge in maintaining the quality of

its data due to (1) the increasing amount of work

needed to keep survey response rates high in the current

cultural climate, with respondents increasingly more

difficult to reach and more resistant to completing

surveys; and (2) the need for expanded and more

complex energy consumption and expenditures data

collection procedures due to the more complex energy

supply structure caused by natural gas and electric

industry restructuring.

EIAs ability to provide data and information on the

natural gas industry may be severely challenged by

changes in the regulatory environment and

corresponding industry restructuring. In addition, there

are major segments of activity relating to prices and

volumes for which no information is collected by EIA,

such as the cost of underground storage, the cost of

transportation, and price and physical transactions at

market centers and market hubs. Since natural gas is

usually the swing fuel in electric generation,

information on these prices is essential in

understanding the fuel decisions made by electric

generator operators and the subsequent impact on

electricity prices.

Validation and Verification:

Data Sources: ! EIAs Action Tracking System

(ATS)

! Web Site Server Logs

Baselines: ! Not Applicable

! 1997

Frequency: ! Annual

! Continuous

Data Storage: ! Microsoft Access Database

! Initial storage on server, later

displaced to CD-ROM

Verification: ! EIAs Web Site at:

http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/aeo.

html

! Software: Webtrends Inc.,

Webtrends 4.1

Planned Program Evaluation:

EIA is in the process of revising its strategic plan. 

During this process, an evaluation of EIAs operational

environment was conducted by EIAs senior

management. This evaluation has formed the basis of

the strategic discussions now underway within EIA.

EIA annually conducts a customer satisfaction survey. 

The results of the customer survey are reviewed by

EIAs senior management. Often specific survey

questions about EIAs web site and electronic products

are included in the customer survey. As a result of the

customer survey, the regular monitoring of customer

comments and concerns and the rapidly increasing use

of EIAs web site, EIA has initiated a cognitive testing

initiative of its web site. EIA's strives to make the site

accessible and usable to the most diverse range of

customers, not just those with technical expertise and

knowledge in energy and web surfing. To do this,

users need to easily and quickly be able to find the data

for which they are looking without being frustrated by

jargon or a design that reflects EIA's organizational

structure and/or publications. The cognitive testing

initiative is testing to see what the specific design and

organization problems users have in finding

information in the EIA web site. The results of this

testing will lead to a redesign of the site to make it

easier to use for the most diverse range of users.

EIAs performance measures are briefed to senior

management on a quarterly basis. Included in this

briefing is number of unique monthly users of the

EIAs web site and EIAs progress in meeting the

established goal.
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

Energy Resources 48

DOE Decision Unit: Power Marketing Administration

Presidents Budget

Program and Financing

(P&F) Accounts and

Program Activities

Decision 

Sub-Units

DOE

Office

FY 2000

Comparable Approp.

($M)

FY 2001 

Request

($M)

270 Energy Supply

Southeastern Power

Administration

Operation & Maintenance,

SEPA

SEPA 8 4

Southwestern Power

Administration

Operation & Maintenance,

SWPA

SWPA 29 28

Western Area Power

Administration

Constr, Rehab, Oper &

Maint.

WAPA 193 165

CRDF, Boulder Canyon

Project

WAPA -- --

Falcon-Amistad O&M WAPA 1 3

Bonneville Power

Administration

Bonneville Power

Administration Fund

BPA (see note 2)

Total, PMAs 230 200

Colorado River Basins Fund WAPA (21) (21)

Notes:

(1) The Colorado River Basins Fund and CRDF-Boulder Canyon Project are revolving funds and require no appropriations. The

adjustments for revenues is included under Corporate Management.

(2) DOEs Budget of $18.9 Billion is the Discretionary Funding Request. BPA is an approximately $2 Billion operation and funds

90% of its activities through its own revenues. The remaining 10% of its operating budget is funded under the Departments

Mandatory Funding and BPA is requesting $331 million for FY 2001 compared to $ 310 appropriated for FY 2000.

Description of the Program:

The Power Marketing Administrations mission fulfills the requirements of the Regional Power Act of 1980, the Federal

Columbia River Transmission Act of 1974, Section 5 of the Flood Control Act of 1944, Section 9 of the Reclamation

Projects Act of 1939, the Bonneville Project Act of 1937, and various other acts, by marketing and reliably delivering

cost-based Federal hydroelectric power, with preference given to publicly-owned electric utilities. This is accomplished

by charging rates for Federal power that are as low as possible to consumers while recovering all operating costs and

repaying the Federal investment in power facilities in a timely manner. 

Bonneville Power Administration (Bonneville) is the Department of Energys electric power marketing administration

for the Federal Columbia River Power System (FCRPS). Bonneville provides electric power (about forty percent of the

electricity consumed in the region), transmission (about three-fourths of the regions high voltage transmission capacity),

and energy efficiency throughout the Pacific Northwest, a 300,000 square mile service area. Bonneville markets the

electric power produced at 29 Federal hydroelectric multipurpose dams in the Pacific Northwest by the U.S. Army Corps

of Engineers and the Bureau of Reclamation, and acquires non-Federal power to meet the needs of its customers utilities.
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

Energy Resources 49

The PMAs programs help achieve the Departments Energy Resources goal through the strategic objectives of reducing

the vulnerability of the U.S. economy to disruptions in energy supplies, and ensuring that a competitive electricity

generation industry is in place that can deliver adequate and affordable supplies with reduced environmental impact.

Annual Performance Goals:

FY 1999 Results FY 2000 Target (Revised Final) FY 2001 Proposed Target

! Ensure that each power system

control area operated by a Power

Marketing Administration (PMA)

receives, for each month of the

fiscal year, a control compliance

rating of pass using the North

American Electric Reliability

Council performance standard.

(ER1-6)

 (MET GOAL)

! Ensure that each power system

control area operated by a

Power Marketing Administration

(PMA) receives, for each month

of the fiscal year, a Control

Compliance Rating of Pass

using the North American

Electric Reliability Council

performance standard. (PMAs)

(ER1-6)

! Meet planned repayment of

principal on power investment. 

(ER1-6)

! Achieve a safety performance of

a 3.3 recordable accident

frequency rate for recordable

injuries per 200,000 hours

worked or the Bureau of Labor

Statistics industry rate,

whichever is lower. (ER1-6)

! Receive monthly a control

compliance rating of pass using

the North American Electric

Reliability Council (NERC)

performance standard. (ER1)

! Meet planned repayment of

principal on power investment.

(ER1)

! Achieve a safety performance of a

3.3 recordable accident frequency

rate for recordable injuries per

200,000 hours worked or the

Bureau of Labor Statistics

industry rate, whichever is lower.

(ER1)

Means and Strategies for FY2001:

In order to achieve safety and reliability while staying

competitive, the SEPA, SWPA and WAPA will

accomplish their missions with 1,509 Federal

employees, $179 million of budget authority, and use

of power revenues and alternative financing authority. 

The PMAs accomplish their missions through five

program activities: Operations and Maintenance,

Construction and Rehabilitation, Purchased Power and

Wheeling, Program Direction, and Utah Reclamation

Mitigation and Conservation. (Not every PMA has

every program activity.)

BPA will accomplish its mission and reliability,

repayment and safety goals by effectively utilizing its

2,755 Federal employees, $331.2 million in estimated

capital obligations, and use of self-financing revenues

and authority through its two business lines: Power and

Transmission. 

To achieve the first goal of Reliability the PMAs 

will make system and maintenance improvements (e.g.,

basic infrastructure, monitoring, communications and

control). They will also make improved to their 

analytic capabilities, work force skills and employee

retention. To achieve the second goal the PMAs will

utilize sound business practices and prudent risk

management, and to achieve the third goal of Safety,

the PMAs will continue to train their employees in

occupational safety and health regulations policies and

procedures and hold safety meetings at employee,

supervisory and management levels in order to keep the 

safety culture strong. Accidents will be reviewed to

ensure that lessons are learned and proper work

protocol is in place.

Collaboration Activities:

The PMAs coordinate their operational activities with

the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Bureau of

Reclamation, NERC regional electric reliability

councils, and their customers.
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

Energy Resources 50

External Factors Affecting Performance:

Achieving and maintaining system reliability can be

affected by weather, natural disasters, changes in

NERC operating standards, new load patterns,

deregulation of the electricity market, changing electric

utility industry organizational structures and additions

to other utilities transmission systems interconnected

to the Federal system.

Achieving and maintaining planned repayment can be

affected by weather, power markets, natural disasters

and other external costs and revenue factors. 

Achieving and maintaining safety goals can be affected

by retirement of existing employees, job market

conditions, hiring authority in regard to hiring new

employees, and the integration of new employees.

Validation and Verification(Goal 1-Reliability):

Data

Sources:

Data on the measures of Area

Control Error variability and

magnitude (CPS1 and CPS2) are

provided by NERC Control Area

Operators each month.

Baselines: Control Performance Rating = Pass

if CPS1 >100% and CPS2 > 90%

Frequency: Monthly

Data Storage: Control Area Operators

Verification: Regional system coordinating

council

Validation and Verification(Goal 2-Repayment):

Data

Sources:

Chief Financial Officers at the

PMAs track and report data.

Baselines: Planned principal payments to the

U.S. Department of Treasury.

Frequency: Annually

Data Storage: Chief Financial Officer

Verification: External auditors

Validation and Verification(Goal 3-Safety):

Data

Sources:

Injury and illness reports are

prepared by the safety office. 

Inquiries are made with managers

and employees.

Baselines: Department of Labor statistics

Frequency: Continuous

Data Storage: PMA safety offices.

Verification: Safety committees reviews reports

Planned Program Evaluation:

Annual performance goals are evaluated against NERC

operating standards for the electric utility industry,

repayment standards set forth in DOE Order RA

6120.2, and the Bureau of Labor Statistics industry

safety rate.
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

National Security 51

Five years ago, I directed the development of the Stockpile Stewardship Program to

maintain our nuclear arsenal through science. The program is an essential safeguard to

accompany the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty. . . . Now, by combining past nuclear

data with the high-tech simulations that computers like those here at Los Alamos make

possible, we are keeping the arsenals safe, reliable, and effective.

President William Jefferson Clinton

Los Alamos National Laboratory

NATIONAL SECURITY

The National Security Business Line supports and

maintains a safe, secure, and reliable enduring stockpile

without nuclear testing, safely dismantles and disposes

of excess nuclear materials, provides technical

leadership for national and global nonproliferation and

nuclear safety activities, develops and supports nuclear

reactor plans for naval propulsion and provides security

for these functions.

NATIONAL SECURITY GOAL

Enhance the national security through the

military application of nuclear technology and

reduce global danger from weapons of mass

destruction.

The funding requested for the National Security

Business Line is within the 050 Atomic Energy

Defense Activities account under Weapons Activities

and Other Defense Activities. The Weapons

Activities account funds the Office of Defense Program

in their efforts to maintain a safe, secure, and reliable

nuclear weapons stockpile utilizing a science-based

approach rather than nuclear weapons testing. 

The Other Defense Activities budget account provides

the funds for this business line, Environmental Quality, 

and Corporate Management. Within the National

Security Business Line are the efforts to reduce the

danger to U.S. National Security posed by weapons of

mass destruction (WMD), specifically efforts to

prevent the spread of WMD materials, technology, and

expertise and the civilian side of the Naval Reactors

program. 

Efforts of a new, consolidated Security Office to ensure

the security of DOEs efforts, Offices of Intelligence

and Counterintelligence which address intelligence and

counterintelligence matters, and minimize the adverse

impacts of program downsizing on those who won the

Cold War and the nearby communities are also funded

by the 050 account. 

The national security portion of environment, safety &

health and contract hearings and appeals are funded by

the 050 account but their performance is presented

under Corporate Management.

The Department issued its plan to implement the

National Nuclear Stewardship Administration on

January 1, 2000. Implementation is required by

March 1, 2000 and will include the offices of Defense

Programs, Nonproliferation and National Security,

Materials Disposition, and Naval Reactors. Although

organization and management structure may change,

performance goals and program evaluation in the plan

should be unaffected.
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

National Security 52

The National Security goal is supported by the

following seven strategic objectives. 

NS1: Maintain and refurbish nuclear weapons in

accordance with directed schedules to sustain

confidence in their safety and reliability 

indefinitely, under the nuclear testing

moratorium and arms reduction treaties.

NS2: Achieve a robust and vital scientific,

engineering and manufacturing capability to

enable the future certification of the

enduring stockpile and the manufacture of

nuclear weapon components under the

nuclear testing moratorium .

NS3: Ensure the vitality and readiness of DOEs

nuclear security enterprise. 

NS4: Provide policy leadership, technology

development and program implementation

to prevent the proliferation of WMD, detect

WMD proliferation, monitor WMD treaties

and agreements, improve international

nuclear safety, security and accounting of

weapons-usable nuclear materials, and

counter WMD terrorism.

NS5: Reduce inventories of U.S. and Russian

surplus weapons fissile materials in a

transparent and irreversible manner.

NS6: Provide the U.S. Navy with safe, militarilyeffective nuclear propulsion plants, and

ensure their continued safe and reliable

operation.

NS7: Ensure the security of the Departments

nuclear materials, facilities, and information

assets.
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

National Security 53

The following table maps the Presidential Budgets Program and Financing (P&F) accounts and program activities to the

Department of Energys offices and decision units. The alignment includes aggregation, disaggregation, and

consolidation. The chart that follows this one shows how the decision units support the Departments Strategic Plan

objectives for this business line.

 Presidential Budget Program and Financing

 (P&F) Accounts and Program Activities

FY 2001

Budget

Request

($M)

DOE

Office

DOE Decision Units

 050 Atomic Energy Defense Activities

 National Nuclear Security Administration(NNSA)

Weapons Activities

Stewardship O&M 3,840 DP Defense Programs

Secure Transportation Asset 116 DP

Program Direction 224 DP

Construction 414 DP

 Subtotal Weapons Activities 4,594 DP Subtotal Defense Programs

Other Defense Activities

Nonproliferation and national security 273 NN Arms Control & Nonproliferation

233 NN Nonproliferation R&D

20 NN International Nuclear Safety

15 NN HEU Transparency

42 NN Program Direction

Subtotal for Nonproliferation and national

security

683 NN Subtotal Nonproliferation and

national security

Fissile materials disposition 223 MD Fissile Materials Disposition 

Naval reactors 678 NE(NR) Naval Reactors

 Total for NNSA 6,178

 Other Atomic Energy Defense Activities

 Intelligence 38 IN Intelligence and

 Counterintelligence 45 CN Counterintelligence

 Worker and Community Transition 25 WT Worker and Community Transition

 Security Office 320 SO Security and Emergency

Operations Office

 Oversight Activities 15 OA Independent Oversight and

Performance Assurance

 Total for other Atomic Energy Defense

 Activities

443

TOTAL - National Security 6,621

The program direction for major programs, such as for Defense Programs, is its own Program Activity in the Presidents

Budget Program and Financing (P&F) schedule. These funds support the management of the program and salaries and

benefits of the Federal staff. Therefore, the Program Direction budget lines do not have performance goals separate

from the performance goals of the Defense Programs.
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

National Security 54

The National Security goal is supported by seven strategic objectives. Each strategic objective is being pursued through

long-term strategies. The Decision Units fund work on those long-term strategies and the annual performance goals are

discussed with the Decision Units on the following pages. DOE Decision Units provide a means to link program

resources at lower levels of aggregation to performance goals. While this approach allows us to clearly link annual

performance with annual budget resources, we are also keeping our strategic plan goals and objectives in focus by 

annotating each performance goal with the strategic objective it supports. 
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

National Security 55

DOE Decision Unit: Defense Programs

Presidents Budget

Program and Financing

(P&F) Accounts and

Program Activities

Decision

Sub-Units

DOE

Office

FY 2000

Comparable

Approp.

($M)

FY 2001

Request

($M)

053, Atomic Energy Defense Activities

Stockpile Stewardship - DP 3,559 3,840

Secure Transportation

Asset

DP 91 116

Program Direction DP 204 224

Construction DP 530 414

Adjustments (63)

Total 4,321 4,594

Introduction of the Decision Unit:

The DOE Stockpile Stewardship Program maintains confidence in the safety, reliability and performance of the nuclear

weapons in the nations stockpile without underground nuclear testing. The program develops and maintains the world

class scientific, engineering, manufacturing and experimental capabilities needed to achieve weapons stockpile

certification for the long term. It ensures the vitality of the DOE national security enterprise, including the physical and

intellectual infrastructure for the three defense national laboratories, the Nevada Test Site, and the Kansas City, Pantex

and Y-12 production plants and Savannah River Tritium facilities. 

Achieving confidence in our ability to certify without underground nuclear testing that the nuclear weapon stockpile

remains safe and reliable for the long term requires capable and experienced people working on significant scientific and

engineering challenges to develop and advance specialized knowledge, tools and techniques. Success requires

appropriate integration and balance of these three elements in meeting current and future mission: carrying out the

directed stockpile workload as well as maintaining the programs infrastructure and developing capabilities needed in the

future. To implement the FY 2000 legislation establishing the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA),

Defense Programs is proposing a major change in program management strategy, and supporting planning, budgeting

and organizational structures. 

In the past year, Defense Programs reintegrated under a single manager the research and development programs and the

Accelerated Strategic Computing Initiative, one of many recommendations from a high level Task Force looking at

integration issues across DP. We have undertaken intensive joint efforts with M&O contractors at all levels of the

program to identify and exploit opportunities for integration, and have proposed to move key missions and capabilities

within the laboratory complex to create centers of excellence while eliminating non-essential duplication, and to better

balance the Stockpile Life Extension Program workload. However, much work remains to transfer specific programs,

projects, and assets to the new NNSA, and the Administration will continue to work on this during FY 2000.

Beginning in FY 1999, we have articulated an integrated approach to Stockpile Stewardship program management, built

upon three elements: Directed Stockpile Work, Campaigns, and Readiness in Technical Base and Facilities. We plan to

update the DPs objectives in the DOE Strategic Plan to reflect this change, and the following FY 2001 Performance

Goals are the first attempt to realign these as well.
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

National Security 56

Annual Performance Goals:

Note: Due to the number of performance goals in this decision unit, the performance goals are discussed in three

sections organized by the strategic plan objectives that the work supports.

FY 1999 Results FY 2000 Target (Revised Final) FY 2001 Proposed Target

Stockpile Confidence (NS1)

! Report annually to the President

that there is no need or lack of

need to resume underground

testing to certify the safety and

reliability of the nuclear weapon

stockpile. (NS1-1) 

(MET GOAL)

! Meeting all annual weapons

maintenance and refurbishment 

schedules developed jointly by the

DOE and DoD. (NS1-1)

 (NEARLY MET GOAL)

! Continued development of dual

path options and selected in

December 1998 a primary tritium

production technology. (NS1-4) 

(MET GOAL)

Weapons Reductions (NS4)

! Report annually to the President

on the need or lack of need to

resume underground testing to

certify the safety and reliability of

the nuclear weapons stockpile. 

(NS1-1)

! Meet all annual weapons

alteration and modification

schedules developed jointly by

DOE and DoD. (NS1-1)

! Complete an internal

comprehensive review of the

Stockpile Stewardship Program.

(NS1-1)

! Begin implementation of the

selected technology to provide a

reliable source of tritium.

(NS1-4)

! Report annually to the President

on the need or lack of need to

resume underground testing to

certify the safety and reliability

of the nuclear weapon stockpile.

(NS1) 

! Meet all annual weapons 

maintenance and refurbishment 

schedules developed jointly by

the DOE and DoD. (NS1)

! Meet annual schedules for the

safe and secure dismantlement

of nuclear warheads that have

been removed from the U.S.

nuclear weapon stockpile. (NS1)

! Adhere to the schedule for the safe

and secure dismantlement of

approximately 275 weapons that

have been removed from the U.S.

nuclear weapon stockpile. (NS4-1) 

(BELOW EXPECTATION: 207

weapons were dismantled and the

difference was due to technical

difficulties.)

! Adhere to approved schedules for

the safe and secure

dismantlement of nuclear

warheads that have been removed

from the U.S. nuclear weapon

stockpile. (NS4-1)

Dismantlement schedule will be

complete enough to be incorporated

under objective NS1.
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

National Security 57

Means and Strategies for FY2001:

In FY 2001, the Department will conduct a wide range

of tests and activities to assess the continuing safety

and reliability of the nation's nuclear weapon stockpile. 

Overall technical reviews by the weapons laboratories

of stockpile weapons will encompass laboratory and

flight tests of materials and components, surveillance

tests, and hydrodynamic testing of components. 

Calculations and computer simulations of weapons will

be used in these assessments. Weapon analyses will

utilize data archived from past underground nuclear

tests. Working through the weapon production plants

and the laboratories, DOE will make deliveries of

limited life and other weapon components for nuclear

weapon stockpile management and refurbishment

according to schedules developed jointly by the DOE

and DoD. Dismantlement activities are also carried out

in support of this objective. Activities will be

conducted with the Department of Defense, ranging

from training in nuclear weapon field maintenance to

partnerships in research supporting non-nuclear

munitions.

Collaboration Activities:

Some activities will be conducted with the Department

of Defense, ranging from training in nuclear weapon

field maintenance to partnerships in research

supporting non-nuclear munitions. Stockpile

Stewardship activities are synergistic with Work for

Others activities sponsored principally by the DoD.

External Factors Affecting Performance:

Implementation of the National Nuclear Security

Administration (NNSA) will be undertaken in

FY 2000. Organization and management structures

may change; however, performance goals and program

evaluation should be essentially unaffected by the

change.

Validation and Verification:

Data

Sources:

Production and Planning Directive

and quarterly reviews

Baselines: Established annually

Frequency: Quarterly

Data Storage: n/a

Verification: DoD

Planned Program Evaluation:

The Stockpile Management Integration Council meets

quarterly to assess progress against major performance

objectives. An outside organization of M&O

contractors, the Defense Programs Advisory Group

(DPAG), is also available to evaluate program

performance if requested by the Deputy Assistant

Secretary (DAS).
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

National Security 58

Annual Performance Goals:

FY 1999 Results FY 2000 Target (Revised Final) FY 2001 Proposed Target

Science Based Stewardship (NS2)

! Demonstrated a 3 trillion

operations per second

computer system. (NS2-1)

 (EXCEEDED GOAL)

! Continue construction of the

National Ignition Facility

(NIF) according to the

Project Execution Plan

schedules. (NS2-2)

(BELOW EXPECTATION: A

new project baseline is being

developed.)

! Conduct two to three

subcritical experiments at the

Nevada Test Site to provide

valuable scientific

information about the

behavior of nuclear materials

during the implosion phase of

a nuclear weapon. (NS2-3)

(MET GOAL)

! Demonstrate a computer code

capable of performing a threedimensional analysis of the

dynamic behavior of a nuclear

weapon primary, including a

prediction of the total explosive

yield, on an ASCI computer

system. (NS2-1)

! Continue construction of the

National Ignition Facility (NIF)

and rebaseline future

construction, total costs, and

schedules by June 2000.

 (NS2-2/FMFIA)

! Obtain approval of Defense

related project management

campaign implementation plan.

(FMFIA)

! Conduct further subsets of the

subcritical experiment begun in

FY 1999 (Oboe) and one

additional subcritical experiment

at the Nevada Test Site to

provide data on the behavior of

nuclear materials during the

implosion phase of a nuclear

weapon. (NS2-3)

! Provide scientific understanding of

the nuclear package of weapon

systems to sustain our ability to

annually certify the nuclear weapon

stockpile without underground

nuclear testing. (NS2)

! Develop the simulation and modeling

tools and capabilities to implement

virtual testing of nuclear weapons and

components in the absence of

underground nuclear testing. (NS2)

! Provide specific tools, capabilities

and components necessary to sustain

the viability of the manufacturing base

within the nuclear weapons complex,

including a reliable source of tritium

by FY 2006. (NS2)

Means and Strategies for FY2001:

In FY 2001, the Department will continue with the

"campaigns approach for activities that address critical

capabilities needed to achieve weapons stockpile

certification. The campaigns are focused efforts with

specific end points, planned and executed by integrated

teams from the laboratories, Nevada Test Site (NTS)

and plants. Campaigns include: Primary Certification,

Materials Properties, Radiography, Secondary

Certification, ICF (inertial confinement fusion)

Ignition, Certification in Hostile Environments,

Defense Applications and Modeling, Weapon System

Engineering, Enhanced Surety, Enhanced Surveillance,

Advanced Design and Production Technologies

(ADAPT), Pit Manufacturing Readiness, Secondary

Readiness, HE/Assembly Readiness, Nonnuclear

Readiness, Materials Readiness, and Tritium

Readiness. It is possible that some of these campaigns

will be merged and refocused as DP continues to

receive comments on the proposed budget structure

from the DOE, OMB and the Congress. Activities to

implement the decision on the use of commercial light

water technology to provide a new tritium source are

now viewed as a campaign and are carried out in

support of this objective.
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

National Security 59

Collaboration Activities:

There are a small number of collaborations with

universities and colleges , mainly associated with the

strategic computing activities and the inertial

confinement fusion research program. 

External Factors Affecting Performance:

Implementation of the National Nuclear Security

Administration (NNSA) will be undertaken in

FY 2000. Organization and management structures

may change; however, performance goals and program

evaluation should be essentially unaffected by the

change.

Validation and Verification:

Data Sources: Campaign

Implementation Plans

and Campaign Program

Plans

Baselines: Established annually in

approved plans. 

Frequency: Quarterly review by DP

program managers

Data Storage: n/a

Verification: Peer and external

reviews.

Planned Program Evaluation:

Federal campaign managers will use the each plan

(above) as a program management tool to manage,

monitor and evaluate progress toward milestones. 

Periodic status reports will be provided to all campaign

managers and quarterly reviews are planned. 
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

National Security 60

Annual Performance Goals:

FY 1999 Results FY 2000 Target (Revised Final) FY 2001 Proposed Target

Enterprise Vitality (NS3)

! Ensure that all facilities required for

successful achievement of the

Stockpile Stewardship Program

remain operational. (NS3-1)

(BELOW EXPECTATION: Enriched

Uranium Operations at the Y-12 Plan

were behind schedule.)

! Meet the established schedules for

downsizing and modernizing our

production facilities. (NS3-1)

(NEARLY MET GOAL)

! Ensure that the capability to resume

underground nuclear testing is

maintained in accordance with

Presidential Decision Directive and

safeguard C of the CTBT. (NS3-5)

(MET GOAL)

! Maintain robust emergency response

assets in accordance with

Presidential Decision Directive 39

and Executive Order 12656, and

federal Emergency Plans. (NS3-5)

(MET GOAL)

! Ensure that all facilities

required for successful

achievement of the Stockpile

Stewardship Program remain

operational. (NS3-1)

! Meet the established schedules

for downsizing and

modernizing our production

facilities. (NS3-1)

! Ensure that the capability to

resume underground nuclear

testing is maintained in

accordance with Presidential

Decision Directive through a

combined experimental and

test readiness program.

(NS3-5)

! Ensure the physical infrastructure

and facilities are operational,

safe, secure, compliant and that a

defined state of readiness is

sustained at all needed facilities. 

(NS3)

! Maintain the DOE Secure

Transportation Asset for safe,

secure transport of nuclear

weapons, special nuclear

materials, and weapon

components. (NS3)

! Ensure that the capability to

resume underground nuclear

testing is maintained in

accordance with Presidential

Decision Directive through a

combined experimental and test

readiness program. (NS3)

! Ensure the availability of a

workforce with the critical skill

necessary to meet long-term

requirements. (NS3)

Means and Strategies for FY2001:

In FY 2001, DOE will continue to oversee and

maintain the infrastructure and plant at governmentowned, contractor operated weapons laboratories and

plants according to applicable statutes, laws,

agreements and standards. DP is developing detailed

facility operation plans to assure that specific

requirements for readiness are maintained. DOE will

also maintain appropriate infrastructure, personnel

knowledge and exercised skills necessary to conduct an

underground nuclear test within 2-3 years. Sites have

been charged with the responsibility to develop and

implement workforce plans in light of the

recommendations of the Chiles Commission. DOE will

provide for enhancements to the DOE Secure

Transportation Asset to address vulnerability issues

raised in reviews in FY 1999. Finally, DOE will

identify the workforce skills necessary to meet longterm stockpile stewardship requirements and will

develop staffing plans to attract and keep staffing

requirements. 

Collaboration Activities:

There are a small number of collaborations with

universities and colleges , mainly associated with the

education program. Also, a limited number of

technology partnership efforts with industry may be

continued from FY 2000.

External Factors Affecting Performance:

Implementation of the National Nuclear Security

Administration (NNSA) will be undertaken in

FY 2000. Organization and management structures

may change; however, performance goals and program

evaluation should be essentially unaffected by the

change.
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

National Security 61

The DOE weapons complex is a government ownedcontractor operated enterprise. DP works proactively

with its contractors, external regulators, and host

communities to assure that facilities and operations are

in compliance with all applicable statutes and

agreements to minimize unscheduled disruption to

program activities that could affect performance.

Validation and Verification:

Data Sources: RTBF Implementation Plans

Baselines: Established in the plans. 

Frequency: Quarterly review by DP program

managers

Planned Program Evaluation:

Each site will have a detailed Readiness in Technical

Base and Facilities (RTBF) Implementation Plan which

will include detailed data sheets on various activities. 

Federal RTBF managers will provide status reports

and will host quarterly reviews of the program. 
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

National Security 62

DOE Decision Unit: Arms Control and Nonproliferation

Presidents Budget

Program and Financing

(P&F) Accounts and

Program Activities

Decision 

Sub-Units

DOE

Office

FY 2000

Comparable Approp.

($M)

FY 2001

Request

($M)

050 Atomic Energy Other Defense Activities

Nonproliferation &

National Security

- NN 263 273

Introduction of the Decision Unit:

Arms Control and Nonproliferation is the focal point within the Department for activities which support the President's

arms control and nonproliferation policies, goals and objectives, as well as statutorily-mandated activities. The major

functional areas of the program include: Policy and Analysis; Reduced Enrichment Research and Test Reactor

(RERTR); International Safeguards; Export Control Operations; Treaties and Agreements; International Security; and

International Materials Protection, Control, and Accounting (MPC&A). The program provides leadership and

representation for the Department in the international arms control and nonproliferation community and the U.S.

Government's interagency process, as well as for the U.S. Government in national and international arms control and

nonproliferation negotiations, agreements and interactions. The Department provides policy and technical leadership for

national and global nonproliferation efforts to reduce the continuing and new global nuclear dangers.

Annual Performance Goals:

FY 1999 Results FY 2000 Target (Revised Final) FY 2001 Proposed Target

! Support U.S.-lead

negotiations on the Fissile

Material Cut-off Treaty at the

United Nations multilateral

conference on disarmament in

Geneva and U.S.-led

Biological and Weapons

Convention negotiations in

Geneva. (NS5-1)

(MET GOAL)

! Evaluate the impacts of

warhead dismantlement and

transparency initiatives.

(NS4-1)

 (MET GOAL)

! Support U.S. Government lead

negotiations on the Fissile Material

Cut-off Treaty and for the

Biological Weapons Convention

negotiations. (NS5-1)

(Note: Dismantlements are expected to

be completed in FY 2000.)

! Support continuing efforts to gain

ratification of the Comprehensive

Test Ban Treaty and steps to

facilitate its subsequent

implementation, including

addressing U.S. responsibilities in

the Prep Com -- developing

procedures for OSI both

internationally and at DOE

facilities. (NS5-1)

! Support negotiations on the Fissile

Material Cut-off Treaty and for the

Biological Weapons Convention

negotiations. Provide analytical

and technical support in

preparation for implementation of

agreement and treaties. (NS5)

! Support continuing efforts to gain

ratification of the Comprehensive

Test Ban Treaty and steps to

facilitate its subsequent

implementation, including

addressing U.S. responsibilities in

the Preparation Committee --

developing procedures for on site

inspections both internationally

and at DOE facilities. (NS5)
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

National Security 63

FY 1999 Results FY 2000 Target (Revised Final) FY 2001 Proposed Target

[Background: Complete spent

fuel canning at the DPRK in

accordance with the Agreed

Framework. relates to NS5-2, but

was not a goal in the 

Performance Agreement]

! Continue to improve and

integrate technology

practices, facilities and

training for material

protection, control, and

accounting for 650 metric tons

of weapons-useable material

at 53 locations (NS5-2)

(EXCEEDED GOAL)

! Further the Nuclear Cities

Initiative promoting

cooperation with the closed

cities in the Russian nuclear

weapons complex to improve

the prospects for defense

conversion and employment of

former weapons scientists.

(NS5-2)

(EXCEEDED GOAL)

! Lead, via the Joint Chairmanship,

the interagency task force on

warhead and fissile material to

implement a START III concept for

warhead elimination by July 2000. 

(NS5-1)

! Provide equipment, technologies

and expertise to the IAEA and the

United Nations Special Commission

(UNSCOM) to support their nuclear

inspections in North Korea and

Iraq. (NS5-1)

! Implement a nuclear spent fuel

maintenance plan by continuing

technical dialogue with the

Democratic Peoples Republic of

North Korea (DPRK). (NS5-1)

! Continue to install MPC&A

upgrades in Russia, for defenserelated sites, civilian sites, Russian

Navy projects, and the

transportation sector. (NS5-2)

! Begin consolidation of weaponsusable material into fewer buildings

and fewer sites, and eliminate 200

kilograms of weapons-grade

nuclear material by converting it to

non-weapons grade form thereby

improving security and reducing

overall cost. (NS5-2)

! Further the Nuclear Cities Initiative

promoting cooperation with the

closed cities in the Russian nuclear

weapons complex to improve the

prospects for defense conversion

and employment of former weapons

scientists. (NS5-2)

! Equip 2-3 Russian sites and conduct

2 joint training sessions under a

Second Line of Defense Initiative. 

(NS5-2)

! Lead, via the Joint Chairmanship,

the interagency task force on

warhead and fissile material to

implement a START III concept for

warhead elimination. (NS5)

! Provide equipment, technologies

and expertise to the IAEA to

continue implementation of

nuclear verification and

monitoring in Iraq. (NS5)

! Provide long-term canister

monitoring and maintenance and

support IAEA activities at DPRK

facility, conduct long-term

maintenance training sessions, and

conduct health physics tests.

(NS5)

! Establish a site operation and

sustainability initiative to ensure

continued security of weaponsusable material at sites where

MPC&A upgrades are complete.

(NS5)
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

National Security 64

FY 1999 Results FY 2000 Target (Revised Final) FY 2001 Proposed Target

! Cooperate with Russian

Federation Customs to block

nuclear smuggling at Russian

border posts with nuclear

detection equipment. (NS5-2)

! Engage approximately 2,000

scientists, engineers and

technicians at nuclear NIS

institutes, and approximately 800

scientists, engineers and

technicians at NIS chemical/

biological institutes in 50 projects

to provide long-term commercial

employment. (NS5-2)

! Ensure safe, secure storage of

spent nuclear fuel at the BN-350

Reactor in Aktau, Kazakhstan.

Complete canning of the fuel onsite, including the existing core. 

Begin work on the long-term

disposition program. (NS5-2)

! Complete the milestones listed in

the FMFIA corrective action plan

for the Departmental Challenge of

Mission Critical Staffing. (FMFIA)

! Engage approximately 2,000

scientists, engineers and technicians

at nuclear NIS institutes, and

approximately 800 scientists,

engineers and technicians at NIS

chemical/ biological institutes over

40 projects to provide long-term

commercial employment. (NS5)

! Ensure safe, secure storage of spent

nuclear fuel at the BN-350 Reactor

in Aktau, Kazakhstan. Continue

construction of storage facility. 

Begin transport of canisters to longterm storage facility under IAEA

safeguards. (NS5)

! Continue export control initiatives

to develop the necessary

infrastructure to ensure control

over nuclear and nuclear-related

dual-use equipment, material, and

technology in Russia and the Newly

Independent States. (NS5)

! Plan and host the Nuclear Suppliers

Group (NSG) Plenary. (NS5)

Means and Strategies for FY 2001:

In FY 2001 the Department, conduct eight weeks of

negotiations, consultation anticipated to last several

weeks, and maintain technical experts to support

deliberations, studies, and domestic and international

exercises and/or conduct multilateral verification

workshops. Conduct three site visits to assess

monitoring impacts and requirements under a Fissile

Material Cut-off Treaty, continue international

consultations on verification of former military plants

in the nuclear weapons states, and conduct mock

inspection. Conduct multi-agency cooperative

assessment, on-site inspection simulations, and

complex data surveys to support the compilation of

treaty and agreement-mandated declaration

submissions. 

In FY 2001, the Department will work with the Russian

Federation to negotiate a treaty and other legally

binding agreements which allows confirmation that

Russian nuclear weapons are being dismantled and that

excess fissile materials removed from dismantled

Russian nuclear weapons are not reused in the

production of new nuclear weapons. The core elements

of this program include the negotiation of a START III

by the Russian Duma, which will actually mandate the

elimination of quantities of nuclear weapons in addition
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

National Security 65

to further reductions in nuclear delivery systems. 

Through Lab-to-Lab WDT efforts, maintain a technical

dialog with Russian scientific and technical

organizations.

Develop and implement an initiative to ensure that the

DOE complex meets all export control statutory

requirements. Provide a leadership role in the

multilateral arena and plan and host the 2001 NSG

Plenary.

DOE will focus on cost-share project involving U.S.

industry, in order to sharpen its focus on facilitating

commercial outcomes in initiatives for proliferation

prevention. The Nuclear Cities Initiative will continue

to create jobs based on new opportunities and sectors

(e.g., environmental projects), viability evaluations, and

business potential.

Collaboration Activities:

DOE coordinates its negotiation and shutdown

activities with the Departments of State and Defense,

and the National Security Council. In export control

area, DOE participates in all interagency fora in support

of mandated licensing policy responsibilities.

External Factors Affecting Performance:

Unwillingness of threshold states to engage in

negotiations; therefore, the lack of negotiated mandates

for the Conference on Disarmament. Political

uncertainties in the former Soviet Union and the

possible ratification of START III by the Duma.

Validation and Verification:

Data

Sources:

Project management reviews and

reports.

Baselines: Technical baselines are specified in

a project plan.

Frequency: Quarterly technical and financial

reports, and annual project life

cycle plans submitted.

Data Storage: The headquarters, field, and

laboratory/contractor activity

managing the project maintain data

on technical progress. DOEs

International Policy and Analysis

Division maintains a project life

cycle summary updated annually, a

detailed quarterly technical and

financial progress reports.

Verification: Analytical, and technical activities

have specific reporting periods. 

DOE supplements these with

broader program reviews.

Planned Program Evaluation:

DOE uses a process of extensive internal and external

reviews to evaluate progress against established plans. 

These reviews provide an opportunity to verify and

validate the performance data that the implementing 

organizations have provided. Detailed, 

quarterly progress reports are received from 

the U.S. Laboratories for this program to ensure

technical progress, costs and schedules are being met.
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

National Security 66

DOE Program Decision Unit: Nonproliferation and Verification R&D

Presidents Budget

Program and Financing

(P&F) Accounts and

Program Activities

Decision

Sub-Units

DOE

Office

FY 2000

Comparable Approp.

($M)

FY 2001

Request

($M)

050 Atomic Energy Defense Activities,

Nonproliferation and

National Security

- NN 225 233

Description of the Program:

The Department of Energy (DOE) Nonproliferation and Verification Research and Development (R&D) Program is

devoted to conducting applied research, development, testing, and evaluation of science and technology for

strengthening the U.S. response to National Security threats and threats to world peace posed by the proliferation of

nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons and special nuclear material diversion. Activities are focused on the

development, design, prototype construction and production of operational sensor systems needed for proliferation

detection, deterrence, nuclear test monitoring, and chemical and biological nonproliferation.

Performance Goals:

FY 1999 Results FY 2000 Target (Revised Final) FY 2001 Proposed Target

Deterring Proliferation

! Complete development and

delivery to customers of two

new counter-nuclearsmuggling detection

technologies, one

portable/hand-held and the

other for wide area tracking

and interdiction. (NS5-3)

(MET GOAL)

Proliferation Detection

! Demonstrate, through

airborne field tests, two new

technologies that use chemical

detection methods to remotely

characterize weapons of mass

destruction proliferation

activities. (NS5-3)

(MET GOAL)

! Develop improved technologies

and systems for early detection,

identification, and response to

weapons of mass destruction

proliferation and illicit materials

trafficking. (NS5-3)

! Launch the Multispectral Thermal

Imager (MTI) small satellite to

demonstrate temperature

measurement from space for the

passive detection and

characterization of proliferant

activities. (NS5-3)

! Develop improved analytical

laboratory and field methods to aid

law enforcement forensic

investigations. (NS5)

! Develop technology to confirm and

monitor the non-reversible

dismantlement of nuclear weapons

and removal of special nuclear

materials from nuclear weapons

cycle while protecting sensitive

information. (NS5)

! Demonstrate and evaluate the

proliferation detection capabilities

of the Multispectral Thermal Imager

(MTI) small satellite launched in

FY 2000. (NS5)

! Advance new techniques for

proliferation detection from

conceptual/lab bench level to field

test/prototype. (NS5)
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

National Security 67

FY 1999 Results FY 2000 Target (Revised Final) FY 2001 Proposed Target

Nuclear Explosion Monitoring

! Deliver to the U.S. National

Data Center for the

Comprehensive Nuclear-TestBan Treaty the first half

(Release 3) of an operational

knowledge base that can be

accessed by automated

processing systems and

human analysts to provide

monitoring and verification

confidence. (NS5-3)

(MET GOAL)

! Deliver three improved sensor

systems for treaty monitoring to

the U.S. Air Force. (NS5-3)

! Deliver to the U.S. National Data

Center 60 percent of an

operational knowledge base that

can be accessed by automated

processing systems and human

analysts to provide monitoring

and verification confidence. 

(NS5-3)

! Produce and deliver three Global

Positioning System (GPS) satellite

nuclear explosion detection sensor

systems per year to provide

uninterrupted capability for

continuous worldwide monitoring

for nuclear explosions occurring in

the atmosphere or space. (NS5)

! Deliver to the U.S. National Data

Center 70 percent of an operational

knowledge base that can be accessed

by automated processing systems

and human analysts to provide

monitoring and verification

confidence. (NS5)

Chemical and Biological

Nonproliferation

! Test first generation prototype

hand-held detector for enhanced

detection of chemical agents.

(NS5-3)

! Complete architecture

development to protect a special

event from biological attacks.

(NS5-3)

! Demonstrate systems to protect key

infrastructure and special events

from chemical and biological

attacks, and demonstrate chemical

and biological detectors. (NS5)

Means and Strategies for FY2001:

The program goal is to enhance U.S. National Security

through needs-driven research and development. The

emphasis is on developing the requisite fundamental

science and technology to detect and prevent nuclear

proliferation, to meet U.S. treaty monitoring goals, and

to develop and demonstrate chemical and biological

detection and related technologies to enable us to better

prepare for and respond to chemical and biological

attacks.

Collaboration Activities:

The DOE will continue to leverage its considerable

nuclear nonproliferation R&D base to address

important objectives including: nuclear warhead

 dismantlement initiatives; countering nuclear

smuggling and terrorism; applying DOEs resident

chemical and biological science expertise to support

U.S. preparation for and response to the use of

chemical and biological agents; and supporting Law

Enforcement agencies. All activities also support the

timely transfer of tested prototype systems to other U.S.

Government agency users. 

External Factors Affecting Performance:

The pace and nature of treaties and agreements related

to the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction will

influence level and kinds of technologies that DOE will

develop for national security.
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

National Security 68

Validation and Verification:

Data Sources: Internal and external program

reviews, national laboratories

reviews, interagency liaison

reviews and government

direction.

Baselines: Stated in program plans and

project life cycle plans.

Frequency: Immediate headquarters response

to unexpected events, otherwise

in quarterly reports or as specified

in program plans.

Data Storage: NN-20 maintains an automated

Project Information Management

System (PMIS) which contains

full life cycle plans including

statements of work, milestones,

deliverables and quarterly reports.

NN-20's automated financial plan

is extracted from the PMIS. 

Verification: Office program and project plans

provide direction for reporting.

Broader reviews are instituted by

Departmental or government

mandate.

Planned Program Evaluation:

Office management, program managers, and laboratory

counterparts continually review project activities. This,

along with Departmental and peer reviews ensure that

appropriate performance measures and applied and

carried out.
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

National Security 69

DOE Program Decision Unit: International Nuclear Safety

Presidents Budget Program

and Financing (P&F) Accounts

and Program Activities

Decision

Sub-Units

DOE

Office

FY 2000

Comparable Approp.

($M)

FY 2001

Request

($M)

050 Atomic Energy

Nonproliferation and National

Security

- NN 15 20

Description of Program:

The mission of the International Nuclear Safety and Cooperation program is to support national security by activities in

international safety and cooperation. The goal is to reduce the national security and environmental risks of nuclear

power plants and nuclear facilities worldwide, especially Soviet-designed reactors, and to assist the host countries to

implement self-sustaining nuclear safety improvement programs capable of reaching internationally accepted safety

practices. Project activities address significant safety issues primarily in Ukraine, Russia, Armenia, and Kazakhstan,. 

The activity improves nuclear safety by participation in international organizations and by development of international

nuclear safety centers. 

Annual Performance Goals:

FY 1999 Results FY 2000 Target (Revised Final) FY 2001 Proposed Target

! Complete the development and

implementation of an effective

reactor plant operator training

program at key plants based on

the Systematic Approach to

Training methodology used in the

United States and provide and

incorporate plant simulators into

the operator training programs.

(NS7-1) 

 (MET GOAL)

! Complete the installation of

Safety Parameter Display

Systems to improve operator

response to emergencies at

Leningrad Unit 4 and

Novororonezh Unit 4. (NS7-1)

(MET GOAL)

! Provide preliminary safety

assessment results to determine

near-term safety improvements. 

(NS7-1)

 (MET GOAL)

! Complete a full-scope

simulator for Kola Unit 4 and

Balakovo Unit 4 in Russia, and

for South Ukraine Unit 3 in

Ukraine. (NS7-1)

! Complete the installation of

Safety Parameter Display

Systems to improve operator

response to emergencies in

Russia and at South Ukraine

Unit 2, Rivne Unit 3, and

Zaporizhzhya in Ukraine. 

(NS7-1)

! Complete a probabilistic risk

assessment for Kola Unit 4 in

Russia and for South Ukraine

and Rivne plants in Ukraine. 

(NS7-1)

! Complete full-scope simulator for

Ukraines Rivne nuclear plant unit

3 and South Ukraine nuclear plant

unit 1, and for Russias Kalinin

nuclear plant unit 1. (NS4)

! Complete safety parameter display

systems for Ukraines South

Ukraine nuclear plant unit 3, and

Zaporizhzhya nuclear plant units 2

and 4. (NS4)

! Complete nuclear service water

system at Armenia nuclear plant.

(NS4)

! Complete in-depth safety

assessment at Ukraines South

Ukraine and Rivne nuclear plants,

and at Russias Kola,

Novovoronezh, and Leningrad

nuclear plants. (NS4)
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

National Security 70

FY 1999 Results FY 2000 Target (Revised Final) FY 2001 Proposed Target

! Complete plans for critical asset

identification within the

Department and test vulnerability

assessment techniques in two

components of the Energy Sector

in countries of the former Soviet

Union. (NS7-1)

(BELOW EXPECTATION: This

was a unfunded mandate but

significant progress was made.)

! Promote U.S. positions and

practices in international forums

that advocate safe reactor

operations. (NS7-1)

(MET GOAL)

! Complete a comprehensive

decommissioning engineering

survey of Chornobyl Unit 1.

(NS7-3)

(MET GOAL)

! Establish a Ukrainian Center

for Nuclear Fuel and Reactor

Core Design and collect

information that will be used to

design and test nuclear fuel.

(NS7-1)

! Obtain final design approval

for the Chornobyl Heat Plant

and complete delivery of major

equipment to the construction

site. (NS7-1)

! Complete fire protection system

upgrades at the Kazakhstan BN-350

nuclear plant. (NS4)

! Complete implementation of

symptom-based emergency

operating instructions at the

Kozloduy plant and at

Novovoronezh plant unit 4.

(NS4)

! Complete projects at the

International Chornobyl Center to

characterize the condition of spent

nuclear fuel at Ukrainian power

plants and to evaluate safe options

for spent fuel management. 

Complete plans and safety analyses

for the shutdown and deactivation

of Chornobyl units 1, 2 and 3. (NS4)

! Complete construction of heat plant

to support long-term

decommissioning of the Chornobyl

reactors. (NS4)

! For the Ukraine nuclear fuel

qualification program, complete

basic technology transfer activities,

and deliver the lead test assemblies. 

(NS4)

Means and Strategies for FY2001:

In FY 2001, the Department will call upon its existing

scientific and engineering expertise and its laboratory

facilities. Because of the nature of the many

international nuclear safety projects, the human and

technological resources employed are by necessity

multi-disciplinary, requiring a diverse technology base. 

The emphasis throughout the international nuclear

safety program is close coordination with internal and

external customers, to ensure responsiveness to their

actual needs.

Collaboration Activities:

DOE coordinates its activities with the Departments of

State and Defense, the U.S. Agency for International

Development, as well as many other international

organizations that are working to improve the safety of

Soviet-designed reactors.

External Factors Affecting Performance:

Extremely poor economic conditions in host countries

impact ability to come up with their portion of work on

projects. Customs issues arise periodically impacting

schedules.
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

National Security 71

Validation and Verification:

Data Sources: Project management reviews and

reports.

Baselines: Technical baselines are specified in

a project work plan.

Frequency: Quarterly technical and financial

reports, and annual project life

cycle plans submitted.

Data Storage: The headquarters, field, and

laboratory/contractor activity

managing the project maintain data

on technical progress.

Verification: Use of fixed price contracts with

payments made only after receipt

of acceptable deliverables. Also,

analytical, and technical activities

have specific reporting periods. 

DOE supplements these with

broader program reviews.

Planned Program Evaluation:

DOE uses a process of extensive internal and external

reviews to evaluate progress against established plans. 

These reviews provide an opportunity to verify and

validate the performance data that the implementing

organizations have provided. Detailed, quarterly

progress reports are received for this program to ensure

technical progress costs and schedules are being met.
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

National Security 72

DOE Decision Unit: Highly Enriched Uranium Transparency Implementation

Presidents Budget Program and

Financing (P&F) Accounts and

Program Activities

Decision 

Sub-Units

DOE

Office

FY 2000

Comparable Approp. 

($M)

FY 2001

Request

($M)

050 Atomic Energy

Nonproliferation and National

Security

- NN 16 15

Description of the Program:

The Highly Enriched Uranium (HEU) Transparency Implementation program is responsible for ensuring that the

nonproliferation aspects of the February 1993 HEU Purchase Agreement between the United States and the Russian

Federation are met. This Agreement covers the purchase over 20 years of low enriched uranium (LEU) derived from at

least 500 metric tons of HEU removed from dismantled Russian nuclear weapons. Under the Agreement, conversion of

the HEU components into LEU is performed in Russian facilities. The purpose of the program is to put into place and

implement those measures agreed to by both sides, that permits the United States to have confidence that the Russian

side is abiding by the Agreement. The program also requires the United States to support comparable monitoring

activities by the Russian Federation representatives at U.S. facilities subject to the Agreement.

Annual Performance Goals:

FY 1999 Results FY 2000 Target (Revised Final) FY 2001 Proposed Target

! Monitor the dilution of 30

metric tons of highly enriched

uranium (HEU) to low

enriched uranium (LEU) from

dismantled Russian nuclear

weapons for purchase by the

United States Enrichment

Corporation (USEC). (NS4-2)

(MET GOAL)

! Monitor the conversion of 30

metric tons of HEU from

dismantled Russian nuclear

weapons into LEU for purchase

by USEC. (NS4-2)

! Conduct up to 24 special

monitoring visits to the four

Russian nuclear processing

facilities. (NS4-2)

! Install permanent monitoring

equipment at the Zelenagorsk

blending facility. (NS4-2)

! Maintain and monitor the UF6

flow and enrichment

measurement equipment installed

at the blend points at a Russian

HEU dilution facility. (NS4-2)

! Conduct Russian technology

demonstrations to further

warhead dismantlement or

transparency measures. (NS4-2)

! Monitor the conversion of 30 metric

tonnes of HEU into LEU for

purchase by USEC. (NS4)

! Conduct up to 24 special monitoring

visits to the four Russian nuclear

processing facilities. (NS4)

! Complete negotiations to open

Permanent Presence Office at

Seversk processing facility. (NS4)

! Maintain and monitor the UF6 flow

and enrichment measurement

equipment installed at the blend

points at Russian HEU dilution

facilities. (NS4)
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

National Security 73

FY 1999 Results FY 2000 Target (Revised Final) FY 2001 Proposed Target

! Compile and analyze collected

data and information into an

assessment of confidence with the

nonproliferation objectives of the

HEU Agreement. (NS4-2)

! Compile and analyze collected data

and information into an assessment

of confidence with the

nonproliferation objectives of the

HEU Agreement. (NS4)

Means and Strategies for FY2001:

In FY 2001, the Department will conduct up to 24

special monitoring visits to the four Russian nuclear

processing facilities in the program. Permanent

presence monitors will conduct transparency operations

at the Ural Electrochemical Integrated Plant and should

complete negotiations to open and staff a permanent

office in Seversk. DOE will maintain and collect

transparency data from permanently installed

monitoring equipment at 2 of 3 blending facilities. 

Technical analyses of collected transparency data will

be conducted and results reported to interagency

working groups.

Collaboration Activities:

DOE coordinates its HEU Transparency

Implementation operations with the Department of

State. We also provide information to DOD and other

DOE programs conducting operations at the four

Russian facilities in the HEU Transparency program.

External Factors Affecting Performance:

Contract negotiations between the U.S. Enrichment

Corporation and Techsnabexport (Tenex) of Russia

will affect the quantity of HEU converted and resultant

LEU delivered per year within the overall contract. 

The effectiveness of the HEU Transparency program

could facilitate U.S. national security and

nonproliferation programs and policy implementation.

Validation and Verification:

Data

Sources:

Project management reviews and

reports. Foreign travel trip reports

and technical debriefings by

monitoring teams.

Baselines: 30MT/year of HEU conversion

established by contract between

Tenex (Russia) and USEC (US). 

Monitoring trips established by

bilateral negotiations are currently set

at 6 per site per year.

Frequency: Technical debriefings conducted for

each monitor team visit via

interagency coordinating group. 

Technical analysis of transparency

data continuously updated and

reported at least semi-annually.

Data

Storage:

Automated Data Analysis, Retrieval

and Transfer system operational and

used for transparency data and related

documents. An automated

information management system will

be available and routinely updated. 

Access to both systems is closely

managed.

Verification: Program management reviews

confirm progress and modifications to

operations. Special and Permanent

monitoring teams provide a report of

activities and technical debriefings to

management and interagency

representatives.

Planned Program Evaluation:

DOE uses a process of extensive program reviews to

evaluate progress against established plans and

milestones. The program also conducts an extensive

data analysis program and reports results to DOE

management and an interagency working group. We

also use a bilateral Transparency Review Committee

process between U.S. and Russian representatives to

modify transparency operations and responsibilities to

match current and planned operations. Cost, schedules,

and program operations are reviewed semi-annually in

addition to monthly status reporting and technical

reviews.
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

National Security 74

DOE Decision Unit: Fissile Materials Disposition 

Presidents Budget

Program and Financing

(P&F) Accounts and Program

Activities

Decision 

Sub-Units

DOE

Office

FY 2000

Comparable Approp.

($M)

FY 2001

Request

($M)

050 Atomic Energy Defense Activities

Fissile Materials Disposition - MD 153 223

Introduction of the Decision Unit:

The Fissile Materials Disposition Program is responsible for implementing a path forward for disposing of surplus U.S.

weapons-usable fissile materials, including highly enriched uranium and plutonium, providing key negotiation and

technical support for efforts to attain reciprocal actions for disposing of surplus Russian plutonium, and storing surplus

U.S. fissile materials pending disposition. These efforts contribute to the Administrations goal to reduce the nuclear

danger and the threat of proliferation by disposing of U.S. surplus plutonium and highly enriched uranium, and helping

Russia dispose of their surplus plutonium.

Annual Performance Goals:

FY 1999 Results FY 2000 Target (Revised Final) FY 2001 Proposed Target

! Complete the final Environmental

Impact Statement and issue a

Record of Decision on siting

plutonium disposition facilities.

(NS4-2)

(NEARLY MET GOAL)

! Initiate design for Pit Disassembly

and Conversion Facility, and the

Mixed Oxide (MOX) Fuel

Fabrication facility. (NS4-2)

(MET GOAL)

! Initiate, by the end of FY 1999,

negotiations with Russia on a

bilateral agreement for the

disposition of surplus weapons

plutonium. (NS4-2)

(EXCEEDED GOAL)

! Continue transfer of U.S. surplus

HEU to the United States

Enrichment Corporation for

dilution and subsequent sale. 

 (NS4-2)

(MET GOAL)

! Complete Title I design of the MOX

Fuel Fabrication Facility required

for submittal of licence application

to the Nuclear Regulatory

Commission. (NS4-2) 

! Begin to implement a bilateral

agreement with Russia for

plutonium disposition.

 (NS4-2/FMFIA)

! Issue the Record of Decision on a

site(s) for three plutonium

disposition facilities.

 (NS4-2/FMFIA)

! Begin the Environmental Impact

Statement for the disposition of

Uranium 233. (NS4-2/FMFIA)

! Ship 4MT (8% of 50MT) of surplus

HEU to U.S. Enrichment

Corporation (USEC). (NS4-2)

! Initiate Title II design of the

Pit Disassembly and

Conversion Facility and the

MOX Fuel Fabrication

Facility within the design

baseline. (NS4)

! Initiate the design of the

Immobilization Facility. (NS4)

! Support international

financing arrangements for

Russian plutonium disposition

activities. (NS4)

! Begin facility upgrades for a

demonstration-scale

plutonium conversion system

in Russia. (NS4)

! Ship 9 MT (18% of 50MT) of

surplus HEU to USEC. (NS4)
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

National Security 75

Means and Strategies for FY 2001:

The Fissile Materials Disposition Program continues

the necessary research and development, facility

design, and site support activities necessary to

implement the Administrations hybrid strategy for U.S.

plutonium disposition (involving both immobilization

and irradiation of MOX fuel in reactors). Following a

bilateral agreement with Russia, anticipated in FY

2000, the U.S. and Russia would each proceed to

implement parallel programs with comparable, although

not necessarily identical, rates of plutonium disposition. 

 The Fissile Materials Disposition Program continues to

dispose of surplus highly enriched uranium by downblending the material to low-enriched uranium for

peaceful use in commercial reactors.

Collaboration Activities:

The United States Enrichment Corporation and the

Tennessee Valley Authority are key players in the

success of the highly enriched uranium disposition

effort. The Department provides technical support to

the U.S. Department of State as the lead for negotiating

a bilateral plutonium disposition agreement with

Russia, and for negotiating with the international

community to provide financial support for plutonium

disposition in Russia.

External Factors Affecting Performance:

Agreement with Russia on plutonium disposition is

needed for the U.S. will not begin construction of

plutonium disposition facilities at Savannah River. The

Nuclear Regulatory Commission is responsible for

licensing the MOX fuel fabrication facility and the

commercial reactors that will irradiate MOX fuel. 

The Fissile Materials Disposition Program also relies

on other Department of Energy elements (Defense

Programs and Environmental Management) to use

existing facilities, personnel, and processes to store and

dispose of surplus fissile materials and to minimize

overall Department costs, to shorten the time to

complete projects, and to provide mutually-beneficial

performance results. Uncoordinated changes in those

baseline programs could impact performance of the

Fissile Materials Disposition program.

Validation and Verification:

Data

Sources:

Technical objectives and progress

specified in research and

development reports and

international agreements; cost

performance data generated by

DOE and contractor financial

systems; program/project specified

schedule tracking systems; project

management reviews.

Baselines: Long-term baselines established by

MD Level 1 Master Schedule;

annual scope, cost, and schedule

baselines established via MD

Annual Operating Plan; project

design and construction baselines

established in Project Execution

Plans and contract requirements.

Frequency: MD required cost and schedule

performance reports reviewed

monthly; technical evaluations

conducted at specified review

points; facility design reviews 

conducted at established increments

of design efforts.

Data Storage: Project management data on MD

network server; technical and

design data on contractor projectspecific computer systems.

Verification: Cost data verified by DOE and MD

financial systems. Schedule data

verified by project work scope

managers through receipt and

review of technical products and

reports and accomplishment of

technical milestones.

Planned Program Evaluation:

MD conducts weekly, monthly, and quarterly reviews

at varying levels to monitor progress in implementing

the Administrations hybrid strategy for plutonium

disposition and for highly enriched uranium

disposition. Reviews will occur more frequently as the

disposition program moves further into the

implementation phases.
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

National Security 76

DOE Decision Unit: Naval Reactors 

Presidents Budget

Program and Financing

(P&F) Accounts and

Program Activities

Decision 

Sub-Units

DOE

Office

FY 2000

Comparable Approp.

($M)

FY 2001 Budget

Request 

($M)

050 Atomic Energy Defense Activities

Naval Reactors - NE-60 675 678

Description of the Program:

Naval Reactors is responsible for all Naval nuclear propulsion work, beginning with technology development,

continuing through reactor operation and, ultimately, reactor plant disposal. The Programs efforts have ensured, and

continue to ensure, the safe operation of the many reactor plants in operating nuclear powered submarines and aircraft

carriers, and have fulfilled the Navys requirements for new reactors to meet evolving national defense demands.

Annual Performance Goals:

FY 1999 Results FY 2000 Target (Revised Final) FY 2001 Proposed Target

! Develop new reactor plants,

including the next generation

reactor, which will be 85

percent complete by the end of

FY 1999, and ensure the safety,

performance reliability, and

service-life of operating

reactors. (NS6-1)

 (EXCEEDED GOAL)

! Ensure radiation exposures to

workers or the public from

Naval Reactors activities are

within Federal limits and no

significant findings result from

environmental inspections by

State and Federal regulators.

(NS6-2)

 (MET GOAL)

! Ensure the safety, performance

reliability, and service-life of

operating reactors. (NS6-1)

! Develop new reactor plants,

including the next generation

reactor, the design of which will

be 90 percent complete by the end

of FY 2000, and complete initial

development efforts on a reactor

plant for the next generation

aircraft carrier. (NS6-1)

! Ensure radiation exposures to

workers or the public from Naval

Reactors activities are within

Federal limits and no significant

findings result from

environmental inspections by

State and Federal regulators.

(NS6-1)

! Ensure the safety, performance,

reliability, and service-life of

operating reactors. (NS6)

! Develop new technologies, methods

and materials to support reactor

plant design, including the next

generation reactor, which will be 93

percent complete by the end of FY

2001, and initiate detailed design

efforts on a reactor plant for the

next generation aircraft carrier.

NS6)

! Maintain outstanding

environmental performance--

ensure no personnel exceed Federal

limits for radiation exposure and no

significant findings result from

environmental inspections by State

and Federal regulators. (NS6)
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

National Security 77

Means and Strategies for FY 2001:

The Department uses two government-owned,

contractor-operated laboratories, the Bettis and Knolls

Atomic Power Laboratories (approx. 5,500 people),

which are solely dedicated to Naval nuclear propulsion

work. Through these laboratories and testing

conducted at the Advanced Test Reactor (ATR) located

at the Idaho National Engineering and Environmental

Laboratory (INEEL), the Department will complete

scheduled design, analysis and testing of reactor plant

components and systems and conduct planned

development, testing, examination, and evaluation of

nuclear fuel systems, materials, and manufacturing and

inspection methods necessary to ensure the continued

safety and reliability of reactor plants in Navy

warships. The Department will also accomplish

planned testing, maintenance and servicing at landbased prototype nuclear propulsion plants, and execute

all planned inactivation of surplus, land-based reactor

plants in support of environmental clean-up goals if the

over target funding is provided. Finally, the

Department will carry out the radiological,

environmental and safety monitoring and ongoing

clean-up of facilities necessary to protect people,

minimize release of hazardous effluents to the

environment and comply with all applicable

regulations.

Collaboration Activities:

Naval nuclear propulsion work is an integrated effort of

the DOE and Navy. The Navy and DOE are full

partners in the Naval Nuclear Propulsion Program. 

Most recently this relationship is set forth in the

Executive Order 12344 and Title 42 of the U.S.C.

7158.

External Factors Affecting Performance:

Industry-specific business conditions, outside

technological developments and Department of Navy

decisions all impact the performance of Naval nuclear

propulsion work.

Validation and Verification:

Data

Sources:

The DOEs Office of Naval Reactors

(NR) maintains an integrated business

and financial management

information system used by

headquarters, field offices and M&O

contractors. This system incorporates

program performance measure data. 

Work outcomes are tracked and

reported at appropriate levels. Both

financial and technical performance

measure accomplishments are

reported and reviewed semi-annually.

Baselines: The baselines are established based

on technical scopes of work and the

associated costs approved by the

Department.

Frequency: Financial performance is updated

monthly. Status of technical

performance is tracked through

various methods, including ongoing

oversight by field offices; periodic, in

depth program reviews; ongoing audit

programs; and formal reports. 

Performance measure status is

reviewed semi-annually.

Data

Storage:

Source documentation is held by the

Office of Naval Reactors.

Verification: Department approval of all work done

at laboratories, close oversight of

M&O contractors, periodic program

reviews, formal audits and appraisals,

and frequent reporting.

Planned Program Evaluation:

DOE uses extensive internal and external reviews to

evaluate progress against established plans. NR plans

semi-annual reviews of performance measure execution

in addition to monthly financial and technical work

reviews with the M&O contractors.
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

National Security 78

DOE Program Decision Units: Intelligence and Counterintelligence

Presidents Budget

Program and Financing

(P&F) Accounts and

Program Activities

Decision 

Unit

DOE

Office

FY 2000

Comparable

Approp.

($M)

FY 2001

Request

($M)

Other Defense Activities

Intelligence Intelligence IN 35 38

Counterintelligence Counterintelligence CN 37 45

Introduction of the Decision Unit:

The Intelligence Program provides the Department, other U.S. government policymakers, and the Intelligence

Community with timely, accurate, high impact foreign intelligence analyses in the following core areas: nuclear

proliferation and weapons; nuclear energy, safety, and waste; science and technology; and energy security. In addition,

this program provides support to the Department's counterintelligence objectives. The Intelligence Program also

provides quick turnaround, specialized technology applications and operational support to the intelligence, special

operations, and law enforcement communities. 

The Counterintelligence program provides the Department, other U.S. Government policymakers, and the Intelligence

Community with the capability to successfully identify, neutralize, and deter intelligence threats directed at the

Departments facilities, personnel, information, and technologies.

Annual Performance Goals:

FY 1999 Results FY 2000 Target (Revised Final) FY 2001 Proposed Target

! Implement the DOE Counterintelligence Action Plan pursuant

to Presidential Decision Directive61 to strengthen controls and

protections of sensitive

information, especially at the

nuclear weapons laboratories.

(NS3-3)

(NEARLY MET GOAL)

! Improve the Departments ability

to identify foreign intelligence

targeting against Departmental

facilities, personnel, information,

and technologies through better

exploitation of all-source

intelligence information. (NS3-3)

! Complete the Counter

Intelligence Implementation

Plans recommendations.

(FMFIA)

! Inform U.S. nonproliferation

and arms control policy

formulation and execution with

all-source evaluations of foreign

nuclear weapons programs.

(NS5)
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

National Security 79

Means and Strategies:

In FY 2001, the Department will produce and

disseminate intelligence analyses assessing the efforts

of key countries, organizations, or individuals to

acquire, develop, or sell nuclear weapons or related

materials, technologies, and expertise. DOE also will

produce and disseminate intelligence analyses

evaluating Russian activities, strategies, intentions, and

requirements with respect to various bilateral and

multilateral nuclear weapons-related treaties and

agreements. 

Collaboration Activities:

In addition to those analyses reflecting the

Department's particular technical expertise and

viewpoints on foreign nuclear weapons programs, DOE

will work with its counterparts in intelligence analysis

of foreign nuclear programs to produce analyses

reflecting common Intelligence Community positions as

well as areas of disagreement on issues of key policy

interest. 

External Factors Affecting Performance:

The availability of credible, high-quality data from

multiple sources will have a direct impact on DOE's

ability to produce solid intelligence analysis on any

given national security issue. In addition, analytic

production on specific countries and topics frequently

is driven by high-profile international developments,

which may influence the mix of coverage in any given

fiscal year. 

Validation and Verification:

Data

Sources:

Quarterly reports and program review

briefings.

Baselines: Established annually in approved

program plans.

Frequency: Quarterly financial progress reports

and annual program reviews.

Data

Storage:

N/A

Verification: Analytic activities have quarterly

reporting periods, which are

supplemented by and expanded upon

in annual program reviews.

Planned Program Evaluation:

Intelligence analytical activities undergo an annual

program review each spring that both reviews progress

and accomplishments in the year to date and 

previews key issues for the upcoming fiscal year. In

addition, a strategic plan for DOE's intelligence

program is being undertaken, to be completed by

January 2001.
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

National Security 80

DOE Program Decision Unit: Worker and Community Transition

Presidents Budget Program

and Financing (P&F) Accounts

and Program Activities

Decision 

Sub-Units

DOE

Office

FY 2000

Comparable Approp.

($M)

FY 2001

Request

($M)

050 Other Defense Activities

Worker and Community

Transition

Worker and

Community Transition

WT 24 25

Introduction of the Decision Unit:

The mission of the Office of Worker and Community Transition is to minimize the social and economic impacts of

changes in the Departments activities and encourage disposition of the Departments unneeded assets. 

The principle functions of the Office are to: (1) establish policy and provide funding for contractor work force

restructuring activities; (2) develop policy for contractor labor relations, oversee the collective bargaining process, and

assist the Departments Field organizations in labor/management relations; (3) establish policy for community transition

and allocate funding to mitigate economic impacts; (4) assist field organizations reduce the operating costs associated

wit maintaining the Departments infrastructure; and (5) provide information and opportunities for participation in the

decision-making process affecting the contractor work force and adjacent communities.

Annual Performance Goals:

FY 1999 Results FY 2000 Target (Revised Final) FY 2001 Proposed Target

! Keep involuntary separations

between 30 and 60 percent of

positions eliminated while

assuring maintenance of essential

work force skills mix and

productivity. (NS3-6)

 (NEARLY MET GOAL)

! Achieve annual recurring costs

savings from separated workers

that is at least three times the one

time cost of separation. (NS3-6)

 (EXCEEDED GOAL)

! Support local community

transition activities that will

create, cumulatively, 15,000 to

20,000 new private sector jobs

by the end of FY 1999. (NS3-6) 

 (EXCEEDED GOAL)

! Limit involuntary termination of

employment at Department of

Energy defense nuclear facilities

between 30 and60 percent of

positions eliminated. (NS3-6)

! Achieve annual recurring costs

savings from separated workers

that is at least three times the one

time cost of separation. (NS3-6)

! Support local community

transition activities that will

create 3,000 to 5,000 jobs during

FY 2000, bring the total jobs

created to between 20,000 and

25,000 by the end of FY 2000. 

(NS3-6)

! Develop strategies to limit

increases in unplanned employee

attrition at early closure sites to

no more than 30 percent, in order

to maintain essential work skills. 

(NS3)

! Achieve annual recurring costs

savings from separated workers

that are at least three times the

one time cost of separation.(NS3)

! Support local community

transition activities that will

create, cumulatively, 24,000 and

27,500 new private sector jobs by

the end of FY 2001. 

 (NS3)
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

National Security 81

Means and Strategies for FY2001:

The Department will achieve the workforce

restructuring objectives through headquarters oversight

and contractor performance measures that will

encourage cost-effective use of voluntary separation

strategies, manage attrition, and internal placement. 

The community transition goal will be achieved through

financial and technical assistance provided to

community reuse organizations at the affected sites. 

The economic conversion goal will be achieved through

headquarters technical assistance and oversight to field

organizations designed to encourage the leveraging of

underutilized assets to achieve cost savings.

 

Collaboration Activities:

The Office of Worker and Community Transition

works through Lead Program Offices at Field activities

to coordinate work force planning and restructuring

requirements and strategies in consultation with

interested stakeholders. The community transition

activities work through the Community Reuse

Organizations (CRO) make up of representatives from

each diverse group within the community.

External Factors Affecting Performance:

Funding levels, contracting strategies, and mission

changes in major operating programs fundamentally

influence the need for work force restructuring and

community transition assistance. Uncertainties in longrange plans and resources could adversely impact the

ability to meet program objectives.

Validation and Verification:

Data

Sources:

Annual Report on Contractor Work

Force Restructuring, Field manager

certifications, Community

Transition Semi-Annual Report

Baselines: Same as above.

Frequency: Annually and semi-annually

Data Storage: Electronic files, WTs office library,

WTs web page

Verification: Field and CRO representatives and

Lead Program Offices at

Headquarters

Planned Program Evaluation:

The Annual Report on Contractor Work Force

Restructuring and independent reviews and audits have

been performed by the GAO and Booz-Allen &

Hamilton, Inc. with anticipated continued external

review and evaluation. Revised community transition

criteria were developed in 1999 in response to GAO

recommendations.
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

National Security 82

DOE Decision Unit: Security and Emergency Operations

Presidents Budget Program

and Financing (P&F) Accounts

and Program Activities

Decision 

Sub-Units

DOE

Office

FY 2000

Comparable Approp.

($M)

FY 2001

Request

($M)

050 - Other Defense Activities

Security and Emergency

Operations

- SO 264 320

Description of the Program:

This new office consolidates functions and budgets from several DOE offices to develop and promulgate safeguards and

security policy, oversee all security-related functions in the Department, and centralize cyber-security and emergency

operations throughout the DOE complex. In FY 2001, the Director of Security and Emergency Operations will have

direct control over safeguards and security funding. As a new office, most of these performance goals for FY 1999 and

FY 2000 were developed and proposed by previous management in support of the then-current Strategic Plan. Linkage

to previous performance goals has been maintained and is identified in the following tables. 

Annual Performance Goals:

FY 1999 Results FY 2000 Target (Revised Final) FY 2001 Proposed Target

! Conduct oversight reviews to

ensure that an effective

Safeguards and Security

program is maintained at all

nuclear weapons facilities. 

(formerly NN) (NS3-1)

(MET GOAL)

! Develop a comprehensive

Weapons of Mass Destruction

Defense Plan which addresses

security planning, equipment,

training, and exercise

requirements. (formerly NN)

(NS3-1)

(MET GOAL)

! Reinforce security awareness

through a Department-wide

campaign. (NS3-3)

! Implement Zero Tolerance Policy

for unauthorized disclosure of

classified safeguards and security

information. (NS3-3)

! Develop a streamlined Site

Safeguards and Security Plan

process. (NS3-3)

! Develop policies to safeguard

DOE nuclear materials, classified

matter, and facilities on a graded

basis. (NS3-3)

! Enforce Zero Tolerance policy for

unauthorized disclosure of

classified safeguards and security

information. (NS7)

! Implement a comprehensive

Weapons of Mass Destruction

Plan which addresses security

planning, equipment, training and

exercises. (NS7)

! Develop policies to safeguard

DOE nuclear materials, classified 

matter, and facilities on a graded

basis, consistent with their

economic and strategic values.

(NS7)
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

National Security 83

FY 1999 Results FY 2000 Target (Revised Final) FY 2001 Proposed Target

! Plan, coordinate, conduct and

participate in an Interagency

National Security Technology

Exchange (INTSE) conference. 

(formerly NN) (NS3-1)

(MET GOAL)

! Initiate needed material

protection, control, and

accountability upgrades at DOE

facilities with weapons-usable

material. (formerly NN) (NS3-3)

(MET GOAL)

! Further the protection of all U.S.

origin nuclear materials in the

U.S. and abroad from possible

theft, loss, or illicit trafficking.

(formerly NN) (NS3-3)

(MET GOAL)

! Consolidate the Personnel Security

Assurance Program and the

Personnel Assurance Program into

a single Departmental Human

Reliability Program. (NS3-3)

! Finalize revision to the DOE

Protective Force Order (DOE

Order 473.2) to include specific

direction which addresses security

planning, training, and exercises

to prepare for a weapon of mass

destruction event. (NS3-3)

! Implement advanced safeguards

and security technologies to

reduce DOE facilities

vulnerabilities to chemical and

other threats. (NS3-3)

! Continue material protection,

control, and accountability

upgrades at DOE facilities with

weapons-usable material. (NS3-3)

! Initiate efforts to implement and

maintain core material control and

accounting software to standardize

nuclear material accounting

throughout DOE. (NS3-3)

! Plan, coordinate, conduct and

participate in an Interagency

National Security Technology

Exchange (INSTE) conference.

(NS7)

! Effectively maintain information

on visits and assignments by

foreign nationals to DOE federal

and contractor sites. (NS7)

! Reduce DOE facilities

vulnerabilities to chemical threats

through sensor development and

chemical protective equipment. 

(NS7)

! Ensure that all sites protecting

CAT I and CAT II nuclear

materials have modernized or

have plans to modernize the site

integrated security

communication, command, and

control systems. (NS7)

! Provide cost-effective technical

solutions to protect the

Departments critical assets,

which include special nuclear

materials, classified information,

and DOE facilities. Satisfy

safeguards treaty obligations.

(NS7)
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

National Security 84

FY 1999 Results FY 2000 Target (Revised Final) FY 2001 Proposed Target

! Develop advanced safeguards and

security technologies for

implementation in FY 2000. 

(formerly NN) (NS3-3)

 (MET GOAL)

! Implement advanced technologies

to prevent the theft or diversion of

special nuclear materials

including the unattended on-line

gamma-ray monitor. (formerly

NN) (NS3-3)

(MET GOAL)

! Issue timely technical reports and

threat assessments regarding

potential domestic and/or foreign

proliferant risks. (formerly NN) 

(NS3-3)

(UNSPECIFIED)

! Develop information on nuclear

materials in waste in a new

Departmental database for all

nuclear materials by the end of the

first quarter of FY 1999. (formerly

NN) (NS3-3)

(NEARLY MET GOAL)

! Demonstrate improvement of a

comprehensive management

system to ensure effective

Departmental response to all DOE

emergencies. (formerly NN)

(NS3-5)

 (MET GOAL)

! Maintain robust emergency

response assets in accordance with

Presidential Decision Directive 39,

The Atomic Energy Act, Executive

Order 12656, and Federal

Emergency Plans. (formerly

DP/NN) (N3-5)

(MET GOAL)

! Expand forensic analysis for

improved cyber security for

classified information systems.

(NS3-3)

! Initiate the correction of DOE

infrastructure vulnerabilities

identified by the Presidents

Commission on Critical

Infrastructure Protection. 

(NS3-3)

! Demonstrate improvement of a

comprehensive management

system to ensure effective

Departmental response to all

DOE emergencies. (NS3-5)

! Maintain robust emergency

response assets in accordance

with Presidential Decision

Directive 39, The Atomic

Energy Act, Executive Order

12656, and Federal Emergency

Plans. (N3-5)

! Identify Pu and HEU inventories

where accountability information

is incomplete, out-of-date or

nonexistent. (NS7)

! Maintain baseline measurement

uncertainty information on Pu and

HEU inventories. (NS7)

! Conduct validation and technical

assessments on inventory data to

identify accountability-related

issues such as inventory

differences. (NS7)

! Work with Nuclear Regulatory

Commission to maintain

information on nuclear materials

in waste in a Departmental

database for all nuclear materials.

(NS7)

! Demonstrate improvement of a

comprehensive emergency

management system to ensure

effective Departmental response to

all DOE emergencies. (NS7)

! Maintain robust emergency

response assets in accordance with

Presidential Decision Directives

39, 41, 62, 63 and 67 and the

Atomic Energy Act, Executive

Order 12656, and Federal

Emergency Plans. 

(NS7)
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

National Security 85

FY 1999 Results FY 2000 Target (Revised Final) FY 2001 Proposed Target

! Continue reviewing DOE

documents for possible

declassification and release of

those that no longer need to be

withheld for security purposes. 

(formerly NN) (CM2-3)

! Implement the fundamental

Classification Policy Review

recommendations and issue 40

classification guides in the

streamlined format containing the

updated guidance. (formerly NN) 

(CM2-3)

! Implement 10 CFR Part 1045

through reviewing 100 percent of

other agency classification guides

submitted, and by conducting five

on-site reviews of other-agency

Restricted Data programs. 

(formerly NN) (CM2-3)

! Implement all declassification

actions concurred in by DOD that

were recommended by the

Fundamental Classification Policy

Review and other internal DOE

reviews. (CM2-3)

! Issue two updated classification

guides in the streamlined guidance

format. (CM2-3)

! Conduct three on-site reviews of

the Restricted Data

implementation programs of other

agencies to evaluate their

implementation of requirements

contained in Part 1045 or the

Special Historical Records Review

Plan required by Public Law 105-

261, Section 3161. (CM2-3)

! Audit documents declassified by

other agencies implementing

section 3.4 of Executive

Order 12958 to ensure that

nuclear weapon design

information is not inadvertently

released (quantity of documents

reviewed depends on number of

documents declassified by other

agencies and available resources). 

(CM3-2)

! Implement all declassification

actions concurred in by DOD

that were recommended by the

Fundamental Classification

Policy Review and other

internal DOE reviews. (NS7)

! Issue two updated classification

guides in the streamlined

guidance format and one

guideline covering certain

technology-related Unclassified

Controlled Nuclear

Information. 

(NS7)

! Conduct three on-site reviews

of the Restricted Data

implementation programs of

other agencies to evaluate their

implementation of requirements

contained in 10 CFR Part 1045

or the Special Historical

Records Review Plan required

by Public Law 105-261, Section

3161. (NS7)

! Audit documents declassified

by other agencies implementing

section 3.4 of Executive

Order 12958 to ensure that

nuclear weapon design

information is not inadvertently

released (quantity of documents

reviewed depends on number of

documents declassified by other

agencies). (NS7)
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

National Security 86

FY 1999 Results FY 2000 Target (Revised Final) FY 2001 Proposed Target

! Accomplish the milestones of the

FMFIA corrective action plan for

the Departmental challenge of

unclassified computer security. 

(formerly MA) (CM5-1)

(MET GOAL)

! Continue to improve infrastructure

to allow staff the capability of

accessing and sharing information

easily and seamlessly across the

DOE complex. (formerly MA)

(CM5-1) 

(MET GOAL)

! Continuously evolve the

Department-wide information

architecture with supporting

standards to foster $100 million on

cost avoidances by FY 2003.

(formerly MA) (CM5-1)

 (EXCEEDED GOAL)

! Implement all FY 1999 milestones

for year 2000 changes for missionessential systems. (formerly MA)

(CM5-1)

(MET GOAL)

! Develop the Corporate

Management Information Program

(CMIP) milestone plan and report

to Congress. (formerly MA)

(CM5-1)

(EXCEEDED GOAL)

! Reduce by 15 actions the

processing backlog of requests for

classified documents submitted

under the Freedom of Information

Act and Executive Order 12958

mandatory review provisions. 

 (CM2-3)

! Complete all FY 2000 milestones

in the Corporate Management

Information Program (CMIP)

Plan. (CM5-1)

! Satisfy all program office

computing/ telecommunications

requirements in Working Capital

Fund Service agreements. (CM5-1)

! Complete the milestones listed in

the FMFIA corrective action plan

for the Departmental Challenge of

Security. (FMFIA)

! Complete the milestones listed in

the FMFIA corrective action plan

for the Departmental Challenge of

Mission Critical Staffing. (FMFIA)

! Reduce by 20 actions the

processing backlog of requests

for classified documents

submitted under the Freedom

of Information Act and

Executive Order 12958

mandatory review provisions. 

(NS7)

! Review DOE documents to

classify those that warrant

protection in the interest of the

national security and declassify

those that do not warrant such

protection (quantity of

documents reviewed depends

on the number of documents

needing review and available

resources). (NS7)

! Complete the milestones listed

in the FMFIA corrective action

plan for the Departmental

Challenge of Security. (FMFIA)

! Complete the milestones listed

in the FMFIA corrective action

plan for the Departmental

Challenge of Mission Critical

Staffing. (FMFIA)
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

National Security 87

Presidents Budget

Program and Financing

(P&F) Accounts and

Program Activities

Decision 

Sub-Units

DOE

Office

FY 2000

Comparable Approp.

($M)

FY 2001

Request

($M)

Other Defense Activities

Oversight Activities - OA 13 15

Description of the Program:

The Office of Independent Oversight and Performance Assurance (OA) is a corporate resource that performs

independent oversight to verify that DOE security interests are protected and that DOE can respond to emergencies. The

Office is committed to excellence and continuously strives for improvement by conducting independent oversight of

safeguards and security performance. The hallmark and highest priority of all Independent Oversight and Performance

Assurance activities is daily excellence in the protection of the workers and the Nation. The Office of Independent

Oversight and Performance Assurance activities are concentrated within one division unit: Independent Oversight and

Performance Assurance; and a program direction decision unit. 

Annual Performance Goals:

FY 1999 Results FY 2000 Target (Revised Final) FY 2001 Proposed Target

! Conduct oversight special

reviews, assessments,

evaluations, and

inspections of such topics

as emergency

management, and

safeguards and security.

(CM1-1)

! Conduct oversight special

reviews, assessments,

evaluations, and inspections of

such topics as emergency

management, safeguards and

security, and cyber-security.

(CM1-1)

! Conduct safeguards and security

evaluations at 20 major sites per year to

provide an independent assessment of the

status of safeguards and security

programs for the Secretary and to

establish a baseline of findings in a

database designed to track and measure

improvement in these areas at sites

throughout the Department. (NS7)

! Perform continuous cyber security

inspections and no-notice reviews at 14

major Departmental sites per year to

improve oversight of cyber security and

establish a baseline of issues through a

new function dedicated solely to cyber

security reviews, offsite monitoring of

Internet security, and controlled attempts

to penetrate security firewalls. This new

function represents a substantial increase

over previous efforts to evaluate cyber

security within the Department. (NS7)

DOE Decision Unit: Independent Oversight & Performance Assurance
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

National Security 88

FY 1999 Results FY 2000 Target (Revised Final) FY 2001 Proposed Target

! Provide for the dedicated oversight

of emergency management issues at

Department Headquarters and 15

major Departmental sites. This

function focuses solely on the

effectiveness of the Departments

emergency management programs

and establish a performance baseline

of the status of these programs

throughout the Department. (NS7)

! Conduct special complex-wide

reviews of topics such as Personnel

Security, Material Control and

Accountability, and Foreign Visits

and Assignments programs to

determine their effectiveness across

the complex. Findings and issues

associated with these programs will

be maintained in a database to track

corrective actions and assist in

measuring improvement in these

critical areas throughout the

Department. (NS7)

Means and Strategies for FY2001:

In order for the Office of Independent Oversight and

Performance Assurance (OA) to achieve its mission, it

requires the technical support of national-level experts

that are at least comparable to Federal personnel at the

excepted service level. While Independent Oversight

and Performance Assurance has some unique, nationallevel experts, these are insufficient to perform all

necessary oversight activities. Further, because of the

nature of the activities, contract support continues to be

more practical and cost-effective to provide a surge

pool of technical experts than expanding the Federal

oversight staff for a number of reasons:

# Peak loads associated with onsite inspections make

it more effective and efficient to use contractor

personnel who are tasked only when needed.

# The need for evaluators with national-level expertise

in different technical disciplines (ranging from

cyber-security to nuclear material control and

accountability) is more efficiently provided by

contractors. The needs for various technical

expertise are continually evolving and frequently

change as new needs are identified. Such evolving

needs can best be met through use of contractors as

the Federal staff and personnel systems are unable to

rapidly respond to the continually changing skills

mix.

Similarly, because of the nature of Independent

Oversight and Performance Assurance activities and

the intense scrutiny that Independent Oversight and

Performance Assurance is under, Independent

Oversight and Performance Assurance reviews must be

performed in a manner that is demonstrably unbiased.
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

National Security 89

Validation and Verification:

Data Sources: Information is collected and

validated at the field sites during

the inspection reviews etc. 

Baselines: Technical baselines are currently

under development for the new

program. 

Frequency: Reviews occur as appropriate with

approximately 20 major sites being

reviewed annually. 

Data Storage: The Office of Independent

Oversight and Performance

Assurance maintains copies of all

reports. All unclassified reports are

available through the INTERNET. 

Verification: All findings during reviews are

validated with the site. The site

also reviews the report before

publication.

Planned Program Evaluation:

OA is the highest level of oversight in the Department

for these activities. An extensive peer and program

review process is followed to assure that reports reflect

the highest quality achievable.
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

National Security 90

This page is intentionally left blank.
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

Environmental Quality 91

ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY

The Department of Energy is committed to honoring

the Governments obligation to clean up sites across the

country that supported the Nations production of

nuclear weapons, to dispose of spent nuclear fuel from

civilian nuclear power plants, and to protect human

health and the environment. The nuclear weapons

complex generated large amounts of waste, which pose

unique problems, including unprecedented volumes of

contaminated soil and water, radiological hazards from

special nuclear material, and a vast number of

contaminated structures. Much of this massive

infrastructure, waste, and contamination still exists. 

The Department of Energys Office of Environmental

Management (EM) has made significant progress over

the past decade in meeting the enormous challenge of

cleaning up the nuclear weapons complex. As of the

beginning of FY 2000, cleanup had been completed at

69 of the 113 geographic sites in the EM program,

leaving 44 to be completed. 

By 2006, the Environmental Management (EM)

program intends to complete cleanup at most of its 44

remaining sites. At the sites remaining after 2006,

including our largest sites, treatment will continue for

the remaining legacy waste streams and management

(including stabilization and disposition) of legacy

nuclear materials will continue. Even after completing

cleanup, the Department will maintain a presence at

most sites to monitor, maintain, and provide

information on the contained residual contamination. 

These activities are designed to maintain the long-term

protection of human health and the environment.

In addition to the environmental legacy of the nuclear

weapons production, the United States has growing

inventories of spent nuclear fuel from commercial

nuclear power reactors currently stored at reactor sites

in 33 States, and spent fuel from nuclear-powered naval

vessels. Geologic disposal is the national strategy for

the ultimate disposition of this spent fuel and of

defense high-level radioactive waste. It is also the

technical foundation for our international stance on

nuclear nonproliferation, as well as the likely path

forward for other materials such as excess fissile

materials. The Department has made substantial

progress in characterizing Yucca Mountain, Nevada, to

determine its suitability as a geologic repository site for

these wastes. A viability assessment drawing on 15

years of study was completed in 1998. Based on the

viability assessment, the Department believes that

Yucca Mountain remains a promising site for a

geologic repository and that work should proceed

toward a decision in 2001 on whether to recommend

the site to the President. A draft environmental impact

statement was published for public comment in 1999. If

the site is recommended for development as the

repository site, a final environmental impact statement

will accompany the site recommendation.

ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY GOAL

Aggressively clean up the environmental

legacy of nuclear weapons and civilian nuclear

research and development programs at the

Departments remaining sites, safely manage

nuclear materials and spent nuclear fuel, and

permanently dispose of the Nations

radioactive wastes.

EQ1: Cleanup and complete closure of the

designated closure sites by 2006, with

stewardship activities continuing.

EQ2: Complete all environmental cleanup projects

at the majority of sites by 2006, where DOEs

mission will continue.

EQ3: Make substantial cleanup progress at the

sites that will not be completed by 2006,

including the three largest sites.

EQ4: Complete the characterization of the Yucca

Mountain site and, assuming it is determined

suitable as a repository and the President and

Congress approve, obtain requisite licenses,

construct and begin emplacement of spent

nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive

wastes in the repository in FY 2010.

EQ5: Manage the material and facility legacies

associated with the Departments uranium

enrichment activities.

EQ6: Improve scientific understanding and

develop and deploy innovative technologies

that reduce cost; are more protective of

workers, the public, and the environment;

and resolve currently intractable problems.
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

Environmental Quality 92

The following table maps the Presidential Budgets Program and Financing (P&F) accounts and program activities to the

Department of Energys offices and decision units. The alignment includes aggregation, disaggregation, and

consolidation. 

Presidents Budget Program and

Financing (P&F) Accounts and

Program Activities

FY 2001

Budget

Request

($M)

DOE 

Office

DOE Decision Unit

050 Atomic Energy Defense Activities

Defense Environmental Restoration

and Waste Management (ERWM)

 

Site/Project Completion 971 EM Environmental Management

Post 2006 Completion 3,108 EM

Program Direction 360 EM

EM Science & Technology 197 EM

 Adjustments (85)

 Subtotal (ERWM) 4,552

Defense Facilities Closure Projects 1,082 EM

Defense Environmental Management

Privatization

515 EM

Uranium Enrichment D&D Fund (420) EM

Adjustments for PY Balances and

Pension Fund 

(85) EM

Defense Nuclear Waste Disposal 112 RW Civilian Radioactive Waste Management

Subtotal - 050 Atomic Energy

Defense Activities

5,633

270 Energy Supply 

Non-Defense Environmental

Management

82 EM Environmental Management

65 EM

140 EM

Subtotal (Non-Defense EM) 286

Uranium Enrichment D&D Fund 303 EM

Nuclear Waste Fund 326 RW Civilian Radioactive Waste Management

Subtotal - 270 Energy Supply 916

Adjustment for Undistributed Nuclear

Waste Fund

(85)

TOTAL Environmental Quality 6,670
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

Environmental Quality 93

The Environmental Quality goal is supported by strategic objectives. Each strategic objective is being pursued through

long-term strategies. The Decision Units fund work on those long-term strategies and the annual performance goals are

discussed with the Decision Units on the following pages. DOE Decision Units provide a means to link program

resources at lower levels of aggregation to performance goals. While this approach allows us to clearly link annual

performance with annual budget resources, we are also keeping our strategic plan goals and objectives in focus by 

annotating each performance goal with the strategic objective it supports. 
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

Environmental Quality 94

Presidents Budget

Program and Financing

(P&F) Accounts and

Program Activities

Decision 

Sub-Units

DOE

Office

FY 2000

Comparable

Approp.

($M)

FY 2001

Request

($M)

Defense Environmental

Restoration and Waste

Management 

- Site/Project Completion

- Post 2006 Completion

- Program Direction

- EM Science & Technology

EM 4,465 4,552

Defense Facilities Closure

Projects

- Site Closure EM 1,060 1,082

Defense Environmental

Management Privatization

- Defense EM Privatization EM 188 515

Non-Defense

Environmental

Management

- Site Closure

- Site/Project Completion

- Post 2006 Completion

EM 307 286

Uranium Enrichment

Decontamination &

Decommissioning Fund

Uranium Enrichment D&D Fund EM 249 303

Adjustments Uranium Enrichment D&D Fund (420) (420)

Total EM 5,851 6,318

Program Decision Unit Description

The Environmental Management (EM) program budget structure categorizes projects according to their specific

appropriation  Defense Environmental Restoration and Waste Management, Defense Facilities Closure, Defense

Environmental Management Privatization, Non-Defense Environmental Management, and the Uranium Enrichment

Decontamination and Decommissioning Fund. The structure of the EM budget continues to be based on the grouping of

activities into projects at the various Departmental sites, a crucial step in accelerating work and lowering the cost of

carrying out the EM mission. 

EMs three budget program accounts reflect near-term goals and emphasis on completion:

# Site Closure provides funding for completing cleanup and closing down facilities with no enduring Federal presence

on-site, except for stewardship activities. The Department has established a goal of completing cleanup at the sites in

this account by the end of 2006. 

# Site/Project Completion funds those projects for which EM has established a goal of completion by 2006 at 1) EM

sites where overall site cleanup will not be fully accomplished by 2006; and 2) DOE sites where EM has set a goal of

completion of all EM projects by 2006 (except for long-term stewardship activities), but where there will be a

continuing Federal workforce at the site to carry out enduring non-EM missions. 

# Post 2006 Completion funds projects that are expected to require work beyond 2006 and includes efforts at the

Departments largest sites, where operations have been carried out over a long period of time and associated cleanup

will take longer to complete. It includes Multi-Site activities, such as Pollution Prevention, Environmental and

Regulatory Activities, Transportation and Packaging, Emergency Preparedness, and National Analytical

Management Program activities. 

DOE Decision Unit: Environmental Management
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

Environmental Quality 95

The EM budget structure also includes accounts for Program Direction (i.e., provides support to the Federal work force

responsible for the overall direction and administrative support of the EM program) and Science and Technology (i.e.,

provides resources and capabilities from basic research through development, demonstration, and technical and

deployment assistance). 

Environmental Management Corporate Performance Measures

EM has developed specific corporate performance measures to link planning goals with the budget, program execution,

and evaluation of program progress and results. The EM corporate performance measures demonstrate tangible results

towards completing cleanup (or achieving the intended end state) at the remaining geographic sites. 

The EM corporate performance measures include:

1. Number of geographic sites completed  This measure tracks geographic site completion progress and supports

strategic objectives EQ1, EQ2 and EQ3. A geographic site is a distinct geographic location that generated waste or

was contaminated by Departmental or predecessor agency activities. As of the beginning of FY 2000, of the 113 sites

in the EM program, 69 sites had been completed.

2. Number of release site assessments and cleanups completed  These measures track release site cleanup progress

and support strategic objectives EQ1, EQ2 and EQ3. Remedial action/release site cleanups are conducted at inactive

waste sites or facilities where releases or spills have occurred and contamination has been released into the

environment. Completion of release site assessments are also tracked to show interim cleanup results. By the end of

FY 2001, approximately 4,900 (50 percent) release site cleanups will be completed out of a total inventory of

approximately 9,700 release sites.

3. Number of facility decommissioning assessments and number of facilities decommissioned  These measures

track facility decommissioning progress and support strategic objectives EQ1, EQ2 and EQ3. Decommissioning

involves the decontamination and dismantlement and removal of nuclear facilities that are no longer active and pose a

risk to public health and the environment. Decommissioning operations range from small cleanup activities involving

portions of buildings to complete structural dismantlement. Completion of facility assessments are also tracked to

show interim decommissioning results. By the end of FY 2001, more than 680 (20 percent) facilities will be

decommissioned out of a total inventory of approximately 3,300 facilities that require decommissioning.

4. Volume of waste disposed by waste type  These measures track waste (i.e., high-level waste, transuranic waste,

mixed low-level waste, and low-level waste) disposal progress and support strategic objectives EQ1, EQ2 and EQ3. 

Waste disposal is defined as waste emplacement designed to ensure isolation of the waste from the biosphere with no

intention of retrieval for the foreseeable future, and requiring a deliberate action to regain access to the waste. Waste

management disposal activities support completion of the geographic sites and will ultimately enable many of the EM

sites to be made available for other beneficial uses. 

 High-Level Waste  High-level waste is highly radioactive waste material resulting from the reprocessing of spent

nuclear fuel, including the liquid waste produced directly in reprocessing and any solid material derived from such

liquid waste that contains fission products in sufficient concentrations, and other highly radioactive material that is

determined, consistent with existing law, to require permanent isolation. The long-term objective for high-level

waste management is disposal in a licensed geologic repository. 

High-level waste is made disposal-ready through treatment to produce canisters of vitrified waste. The Department

is currently vitrifying liquid high-level waste at the Defense Waste Processing Facility at the Savannah River Site

in South Carolina and the West Valley Demonstration Project in New York. By the end of FY 2001,

approximately 1,370 canisters of high-level waste will be produced. This will complete about 7 percent of the

more than 19,000 canisters of high-level waste that will be produced between 

FY 1996 and life-cycle completion.

 Mixed Low-Level Waste  Mixed low-level waste consists of both hazardous (as defined by the Resource

Conservation and Recovery Act) and radioactive (as defined by the Atomic Energy Act) components and is not
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

Environmental Quality 96

high-level or transuranic waste. The long-term goal for mixed low-level waste is to develop the necessary

treatment and disposal capacity needed to dispose of the existing inventory as well as any newly generated waste. 

The near-term goal for mixed waste is to complete site selection for disposal facilities and optimize the treatment

configuration outlined in the site treatment plans. By the end of FY 2001, more than 43,000 cubic meters of mixed

low-level waste will be disposed. This will complete about 18 percent of the total volume of mixed low-level waste

(approximately 234,000 cubic meters) that requires disposal between

FY 1998 and life-cycle completion.

 Transuranic Waste  Transuranic waste is radioactive waste containing more than 100 nanocuries of alphaemitting transuranic isotopes per gram of waste, with half-lives greater than 20 years, except for 

a) high-level radioactive waste; b) waste that the Secretary of Energy has determined, with the concurrence of the

Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, does not need the degree of isolation required by the 40

CFR Part 191 disposal regulations; or c) waste that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission has approved for disposal

on a case-by-case basis in accordance with 10 CFR Part 61. The long-term objective is to dispose of all defense

related transuranic waste at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) in New Mexico. The Department initiated

disposal operations at WIPP on March 26, 1999. Approximately 98 percent of DOEs transuranic waste is stored

at six major sites: Los Alamos National Laboratory, Rocky Flats Environmental Technology Site, Oak Ridge

National Laboratory, Hanford Site, Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory, and the Savannah

River Site. By the end of FY 2001, more than 4,900 cubic meters of transuranic waste will be shipped to WIPP for

disposal. This will complete about 3 percent of the total volume of transuranic waste (175,600 cubic meters) that

requires disposal between 

FY 1998 and 2034. (The WIPP legal limit of 175,6000 cubic meters is provided as the life-cycle estimate since the

expectation is that the full capacity at WIPP will be needed to dispose of EMs transuranic waste). 

 Low-Level Waste  Low-level waste is radioactive waste that is not high-level radioactive waste, transuranic

waste, spent nuclear fuel, byproduct material (as defined under the Atomic Energy Act of 1954) or naturally

occurring radioactive material. The near-term and long-term goals of low-level waste management are to continue

to dispose of low-level waste at a pace to eliminate currently stored low-level waste and match generation of new

waste. By the end of FY 2001, a total of more than 143,000 cubic meters of low-level waste will be disposed. This

will complete about 9 percent of the total volume of low-level waste (approximately 1,566,000 cubic meters) that

requires disposal between FY 1998 and life-cycle completion.

5. Quantity of nuclear material and spent nuclear fuel stabilized  These measures track progress on the

stabilization of nuclear material and spent nuclear fuel and support strategic objectives EQ1, EQ2 and EQ3. The

Department must stabilize these materials and fuel (i.e., produce a safer chemical and/or physical form of the

material) to reduce the level of potential risk such as exposure to radiation, contamination of people and the

environment, and critical events. Stabilization means that something (i.e., processing from a liquid to a solid form,

processing to remove activated waste streams, repackaging, etc.) must be done to the nuclear material so that they

pose significantly less risk to workers, the public, and/or environment. The following types of nuclear material are

reported in this plan under stabilization and include spent nuclear fuel which requires processing in the Savannah

River canyons: kilograms bulk of plutonium residue; containers of plutonium metals/oxides; and handling units of

other nuclear material in other forms. By the end of FY 2001, the Department will stabilize approximately 94,000

kilograms bulk of plutonium residue, 1,200 containers of plutonium metals/oxides, and 450 handling units of other

nuclear material in other forms. This will complete approximately 85 percent of the kilograms bulk of plutonium

residue, 17 percent of the plutonium metals/oxides, and 5 percent of the handling units of other nuclear material in

other forms that require stabilization between FY 1998 and life-cycle completion. The number of metric tons of

heavy metal of spent nuclear fuel that is moved to dry storage is also reported. By the end of FY 2001, a total of

approximately 315 metric tons of heavy metal of spent nuclear fuel will be moved to dry storage. This will complete

14 percent of the total amount of spent nuclear fuel (2,215 metric tons of heavy metal) that will be moved to dry

storage between FY 1998 and life-cycle completion. 

6. Technology Development and Deployment  These measures track progress on technology development and

deployment and support strategic objective EQ6. Deployment is the use of a technology or technology system toward

accomplishment of one or more site-specific DOE EM program cleanup objectives as applied to the actual waste
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

Environmental Quality 97

requiring management at the site. The intent of this measure is to encourage sites to deploy innovative technologies

to solve cleanup problems and reduce cost. 

7. Long-Term Stewardship  The performance goals established for long-term stewardship reflect the Departments

commitment to addressing its long-term stewardship responsibilities. Long-term stewardship is required to protect

human health and the environment from hazards remaining after cleanup is complete. The nature and extent of

anticipated long-term stewardship activities will vary based on the amount and type of residual contamination, the

anticipated future site uses, and other factors (e.g., proximity to a river and flood plain). 

8. Pollution Prevention  These measures track progress on the waste reduced and avoided as a result of the

Departments pollution prevention activities. Pollution prevention is defined as the use of materials, processes, and

practices that reduce or eliminate the generation and release of pollutants, contaminants, hazardous substances, and

wastes into the land, water, and air. Pollution Prevention includes practices that protect natural resources through

conservation and more efficient use. Within the Department, pollution prevention includes all aspects of sources

reduction as defined by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and incorporates waste minimization by

expanding beyond the EPA definition of pollution prevention to include recycling.
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

Environmental Quality 98

5 0

6 1

6 6

7 9 8 2 8 5 8 9 9 2

6 9

7 4

7 1

0

2 0

4 0

6 0

8 0

100

120

Pre

1997

1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006

Cumulative Site Completions

Total Number of Sites - 113

Annual Performance Goals for Environmental Management:

1. Geographic Site Completions

Performance Goal:

! By year-end FY 2001, complete the following geographic sites increasing the total number of completed sites to

74 of the 113 geographic sites in the EM program: (FMFIA)

S 2 geographic sites in FY 2000 (Columbus Environmental Management Project  King Avenue Site in Ohio

and General Atomics in California); and 

S 3 geographic sites in FY 2001 (Argonne National Laboratory-West in Idaho, Grand Junction Office Site in

Colorado and Monticello Remedial Action Project in Utah).

! Monitor field activities and participate in reviews at Savannah River Operations Office to ensure adherence to

project costs and schedules. This is an FY 2000 FMFIA milestone. (FMFIA)

FY 1999 Results: MET GOAL

EM completed three sites in FY 1999: Ames Laboratory in Iowa, Sandia National Laboratory in California, and

Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory in New Jersey.

Means & Strategies for Geographic Site Completion

for FY 2001:

The Department is implementing strategies to

accomplish the EM program vision of completing

cleanup at most of EMs remaining geographic sites by

2006. As of the beginning of FY 2000, a total of 44

geographic sites remained to be cleaned up. EM plans

to complete 2 geographic sites in FY 2000 and an

additional 3 geographic sites in FY 2001.

A geographic site is considered complete (or at its

end state) when:

S Legacy waste (i.e., waste produced by past nuclear

weapons production activities, with the exception of

high-level waste) has been disposed of in an

approved manner;

S Deactivation or decommissioning of all facilities

currently in the EM program has been completed,

excluding any long-term surveillance and

monitoring;

S All releases to the environment have been cleaned

up in accordance with agreed-upon cleanup

standards;

S Groundwater contamination has been contained, or

long-term treatment or monitoring is in place; and

S Nuclear material and spent fuel have been stabilized

and/or placed in safe long-term storage.
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

Environmental Quality 99

288

378

103

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

FY 1999 FY 2000 FY 2001

Number of Assessments

161

252

166

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

FY 1999 FY 2000 FY 2001

Number of Cleanups

2a. Release Site Assessments Progress

Performance Goal:

! Complete 378 release site assessments in FY

2000 and 103 in FY 2001.

Assessments are required to determine the extent

of contamination and risk prior to beginning

actual cleanup work. 

FY 1999 Results: NEARLY MET GOAL

EM completed 288 of the planned 310 release

site assessments.

2b. Release Site Cleanup Progress

Performance Goal:

! Complete 252 release site cleanups in FY 2000

and 166 in FY 2001, increasing the total number

of release site cleanups completed to

approximately 4,900 (50%) out of a total

inventory of approximately 9,700 release sites. 

Release site cleanups represent the completion of 

physical cleanup activities (or no further action

decisions). 

FY 1999 Results: NEARLY MET GOAL

EM completed 161 of the planned 165 release

site cleanups.
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

Environmental Quality 100

109

64

40

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

FY 1999 FY 2000 FY 2001

Number of Assessments

92

82

46

0

20

40

60

80

100

FY 1999 FY 2000 FY 2001

Number of Decommissionings

3a. Facility Decommissioning Assessment Progress

Performance Goal:

! Complete 64 facility decommissioning 

assessments in FY 2000 and 40 in FY 2001. 

Completion of facility assessments indicate that

the facilities have been characterized for

decommissioning. 

FY 1999 Results: NEARLY MET GOAL

EM completed 109 of the planned 120 facility

decommissioning assessments.

3b. Facility Decommissioning Progress

Performance Goal:

! Decommission 82 facilities in FY 2000 and 46

facilities in FY 2001, increasing the total number

of facilities decommissioned to more than 680

(20%) out of a total inventory of approximately

3,300 facilities that require decommissioning. 

Facilities decommissioned represent the number

of completed final safe dismantling, and removal

of contamination and structures (or release of

inactive facilities for reuse). 

FY 1999 Results: EXCEEDED GOAL

EM decommissioned 92 facilities exceeding the

goal of 80.

Means and Strategies for Cleanup Progress for

FY 2001:

The Department will first focus on reducing any worker

or public safety and health risks; then on off-site

contamination; prevention of contamination migration;

reduction of on-site contamination; allocation of

resources to effectively maintain essential infrastructure

support; funding for other essential prudent business

management activities; release of facilities and land to

the public for beneficial reuse where this is deemed

appropriate; and finally, additional characterization

efforts to reduce uncertainty at the various sites in

regard to eventual cleanup approaches.

 

Cleanup progress is measured by completion of

geographic sites where EM is responsible for

remediation of contaminants and other material. 

Interim progress is demonstrated by cleaning up

portions of the EM geographic sites, referred to as

Release Sites and Facilities. Cleaning up these

areas ultimately leads to the completion of the entire

geographic site. 

The Department will continue to conduct facility

surveillance and maintenance activities to ensure there

is: (1) no degradation of key plant systems;

(2) retention of authorized basis and configuration

control; (3) maintenance of key staffing, qualifications,

and training; and (4) compliance with Federal and

State safety and environmental regulations. 
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

Environmental Quality 101

248

205 205

0

50

100

150

200

250

FY 1999 FY 2000 FY 2001

Canisters

282

1,200

3,450

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

3,500

4,000

FY 1999 FY 2000 FY 2001

Cubic Meters

4a. High Level Waste (HLW) Progress  Canisters Produced

Performance Goal:

! Produce a total of 205 canisters of HLW in both 

FY 2000 and FY 2001 (200 canisters at the

Defense Waste Processing Facility (DWPF) at

Savannah River Site and 5 canisters at West

Valley Demonstration Project). This will

complete about 5 percent of the total number of

canisters that will be produced from FY 1998 to

life-cycle completion. 

FY 1999 Results: EXCEEDED GOAL

The DWPF produced 236 canisters of HLW and

West Valley produced 12 canisters of HLW,

exceeding the goal of 215 canisters.

4b. Transuranic (TRU) Waste Progress  Shipments to WIPP

Performance Goal:

! Ship 1,200 cubic meters of TRU waste to WIPP

in FY 2000 and 3,450 cubic meters in FY 2001. 

By the end of FY 2001, a total of more than 4,900

cubic meters of TRU waste will be shipped to

WIPP for disposal. This will complete about 3

percent of the total volume of TRU waste that

requires disposal between FY 1998 and 2034.

! Implement the permit requirements in parallel

with the court challenge and begin Mixed TRU

waste disposal operations at WIPP in FY 2000.

 (FMFIA) 

FY 1999 Results: NEARLY MET GOAL 

Approximately 280 cubic meters of TRU waste

were shipped to WIPP for disposal. The plan

was to prepare 700 cubic meters and and ship 100

to 200 cubic meters. Delayed opening of WIPP

postponed the preparation of additional waste for

disposal.
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

Environmental Quality 102

14,300

10,000

7,500

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

14,000

16,000

FY 1999 FY 2000 FY 2001

Cubic Meters

49,400

40,000

27,000

0

10,000

20,000

30,000

40,000

50,000

FY 1999 FY 2000 FY 2001

Cubic Meters

4c. Mixed Low-Level Waste (MLLW) Disposal Progress

Performance Goal:

! Dispose of approximately 10,000 cubic meters of

MLLW in FY 2000 and 7,500 cubic meters in

FY 2001. By the end of FY 2001, a total of more

than 43,000 cubic meters of MLLW will be

disposed. This will complete about 18 percent of

the total volume of MLLW that requires disposal

between FY 1998 and life-cycle completion.

FY 1999 Results: MET GOAL

4d. Low-Level Waste (LLW) Disposal Progress

Performance Goal:

! Dispose of approximately 40,000 cubic meters of

LLW in FY 2000 and 27,000 cubic meters in FY

2001. By the end of FY 2001, a total of more

than 143,000 cubic meters of low-level waste will

be disposed. This will complete about 9 percent

of the total volume of LLW that requires disposal

between FY 1998 and life-cycle completion.

FY 1999 Results: BELOW EXPECTATION

EM disposed of more than 49,400 cubic meters

of LLW. Contributing factors were: Lack of

agreement with the State of Nevada on cleanup

standards; and lack of NEPA authority to ship

stored waste at Oak Ridge.

Means & Strategies for Waste Management for FY

2001:

Waste management programs will continue to dispose

of DOE low-level and mixed radioactive waste

primarily at its current disposal facilities although the

Department, with stakeholder participation, will

consider alternative disposition paths that are more

cost-effective while still protective of the public and the

environment. The Department will continue to ship

transuranic waste to the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant for

disposal, and continue vitrification operations to

produce disposal ready high-level waste canisters.

Operations will minimize generation of new waste, reuse, and recycle where possible to accomplish pollution

prevention goals. In addition, the Department will

continue to re-engineer waste management practices

and strive to have newly generated wastes disposed as

generated. Waste management activities will ensure

safe handling and storage of waste in addition to

maximizing isolation to reduce risks. The Department

will integrate waste management programs across the

DOE complex by consolidating waste storage,

treatment and disposal facilities to maximize efficiency, 

reduce environmental risks and costs of operations. 

Efforts will continue to improve the quality and value

of information on the generation, inventory,

management, and transportation of DOE waste.
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

Environmental Quality 103

275 400 500

31,033

41,000

16,000

438 130 450

0

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

30,000

35,000

40,000

45,000

FY 1999 FY 2000 FY 2001

P u M et al /Oxides (Cont .)

P u R es i dues (kg B ulk)

Ot her Nucl ear M at er ial (HU )

0.340

35.070

279.570

0.000

50.000

100.000

150.000

200.000

250.000

300.000

FY 1999 FY 2000 FY 2001

MTHM

5a. Nuclear Material Stabilization (Plutonium) Progress

Performance Goal:

! In FY 2000 stabilize 400 containers of plutonium

metals/oxides, 41,000 kilograms bulk of plutonium

residues, and 130 handling units of other nuclear

material in other forms.

! In FY 2001, stabilize 500 containers of plutonium

metals/oxides, 16,000 kilograms bulk of plutonium

residues, and 450 handling units of other nuclear

material in other forms.

By the end of FY 2001, this will complete about 17

percent of the containers of plutonium metals/oxides,

85 percent of the kilograms bulk of plutonium

residues, and 5 percent of the handling units of other

nuclear material in other forms that require

stabilization between FY 1998 and life-cycle

completion. Stabilization encompasses activities

where the intent is to convert nuclear material to a

stable form suitable for either safe interim or longterm storage.

FY 1999 Results: NEARLY MET GOAL

EM stabilized 31,033 kilograms bulk of plutonium

residues, 16 liters of plutonium solution, 275

containers of plutonium metals/oxides, and 438

handling units of other nuclear material in other

forms. Seismic issue and equipment malfunctions of

the stabilization system at Richland contributed to the

shortfall.

5b. Spent Nuclear Fuel (SNF) Stabilization Progress

Performance Goal:

! Move to dry storage 35.070 metric tons of heavy metal

(MTHM) of SNF in FY 2000 and 279.57 MTHM in FY

2001. This will complete 14 percent of the MTHM of

SNF that will be moved to dry storage between FY

1998 and life-cycle completion.

Moving SNF to dry storage is an interim step prior to

disposal. 

FY 1999 Results: BELOW EXPECTATION

In FY 1999, 0.34 MTHM of SNF was stabilized. This

was a result of a criticality issue discovered in the dewatering system operation that precluded processing

Three Mile Island spent nuclear fuel canisters.
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

Environmental Quality 104

27

30

25

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

FY 1999 FY 2000 FY 2001

Number of Technologies 

Demonstrated

40

30 32

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

FY 1999 FY 2000 FY 2001

Number of Technologies 

Ready for Implementation

Means and Strategies for Nuclear Material and SNF

Stabilization for FY 2001: 

The Department will work closely with regulators, the

Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board (DNFSB) and

others to achieve the objective of reducing worker,

public, and environmental risks. Progress is measured

by the amount of nuclear material stabilized and made

disposition ready. Nuclear material will be stabilized at

 the F- and H-Areas at Savannah River, at the

Plutonium Finishing Plant at Richland, and in several

facilities at the Rocky Flats Environmental Technology

Site. Spent nuclear fuel from the West Valley

Demonstration Project and Three Mile Island will be

placed in dry storage at the Idaho National Engineering

and Environmental Laboratory. These activities have

been prioritized so that the most serious risks are

addressed first. 

6a. Technology Demonstration Progress

Performance Goal:

! Demonstrate 30 innovative technologies in FY

2000 and 25 in FY 2001, that meet the

performance-specification based needs as

identified by the Site Technology Coordination

Groups. 

FY 1999 Results: EXCEEDED GOAL.

27 full scale demonstrations were completed

exceeding the goal of 22.

6b. Technologies Ready for Implementation Progress

Performance Goal:

! Make 30 innovative technologies ready for

implementation in FY 2000 and 32 in FY 2001,

with full cost and engineering performance data. 

 

FY 1999 Results: MET GOAL.
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

Environmental Quality 105

129

60 60

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

FY 1999 FY 2000 FY 2001

Number of Deployments

6c. Technology Deployment Progress:

Performance Goal:

! Deploy 60 innovative technologies in FY 2000

and 60 in FY 2001. 

Deployment is the use of a technology or

technology system toward accomplishment of one

or more site-specific DOE EM program cleanup

objectives as applied to the actual waste requiring

management at the site.

FY 1999 Results: EXCEEDED GOAL

129 innovative technology deployments were

achieved exceeding the goal of 60.

Means and Strategies for Technology Development

and Deployment for FY 2001: 

Science and Technology provides environmental

cleanup technologies and technical solutions on a

schedule that enables achieving cleanup and bringing

into compliance the majority of the DOE complex by

2006. Investments in science and technology will

continue to be planned and managed in an interactive,

coordinated, participatory relationship with EM cleanup

project managers and stakeholders. The Science and

Technology work scope priorities will be established

through a multi-attribute decision model that prioritizes

 EMs technology needs and drives investments for

science and technology. No activity will be funded

unless it: addresses one of EMs highest priority needs;

reduces the cost of EMs costliest cleanup projects;

reduces EMs technological risk; accelerates and

increases technology deployment by bridging the gap

between development and use; or contributes to a

targeted scientific research agenda. EMs technology

development efforts in FY 2001 will concentrate on

five major Focus Areas: (1) Mixed Waste; (2)

Radioactive Tank Waste; (3) Subsurface Contaminants;

(4) Deactivation and Decommissioning and (5) Nuclear

Materials (formerly Plutonium Stabilization).
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

Environmental Quality 106

7. Annual Performance Goals for Long Term Stewardship:

Over the next several years the Department will, in conjunction with stakeholders, develop comprehensive land use

plans for DOE sites that provide information on alternative uses, ownership, environmental requirements, and

implementation schedules and ensure environmental remedies remain protective.

FY 1999 Results FY 2000 Target (Revised Final) FY 2001 Proposed Target

! Release a background report on

Long-Term Stewardship (Moving

from Cleanup to Stewardship) by

the second quarter of FY 1999. This

report was one of the commitments

published in the June 1998 Paths to

Closure document. (EQ7-1)

(MET GOAL)

! Begin the formal study on long-term

stewardship pursuant to the 1998

Programmatic Environmental Impact

Statement (PEIS) settlement

agreement, which requires a public

scoping and comment process

portion of the study. (EQ7-1)

(MET GOAL)

! By June 2000, produce the draft

study on long-term stewardship

pursuant to the 1998 PEIS

settlement agreement. (EQ7-2)

! Continue coordination with the

National Academy of Sciences/

National Research Council on

the release of their analyses on

long-term site disposition..

(EQ7-2)

! Submit a report to Congress

by October 1, 2000, which

documents existing and

anticipated long-term

stewardship responsibilities

for DOE sites or portions of

DOE sites where cleanup

projects are projected to be 

complete by calendar year-end

2006. (EQ1, EQ2, EQ3)

! Identify funding requirements

for long-term stewardship as

distinct baselines at individual

sites. (EQ1, EQ2, EQ3)

! Produce the final study on

long-term stewardship

pursuant to the 1998 PEIS

settlement agreement. 

 (EQ1, EQ2, EQ3)

Means and Strategies for Long-Term Stewardship

for FY 2001:

In the near-term, DOE will improve its management

control of long-term stewardship by identifying

ongoing activities and funding support for long-term

stewardship. Over the next several years the

Department will, in conjunction with stakeholders,

develop comprehensive land use plans for DOE sites

that provide information on alternative uses, ownership,

environmental requirements, and implementation

schedules and ensure environmental remedies remain

protective.

The Department will continue to work with state and

federal regulatory agencies, as well as Indian tribes,

local governments and community organizations on

formulating environmental cleanup remedies that

consider future land use. The Department will seek to

encourage beneficial reuse of land by coordinating with

the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) brown

fields initiative and sharing lessons learned with the

Department of Defense (DOD) Baseline Realignment

and Closure (BRAC) process. 

The Department will also implement a framework for

its long-term stewardship program, including resources

for site personnel on data retention, institutional

controls and remedy selection consideration. 
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

Environmental Quality 107

8. Annual Performance Goals for Pollution Prevention:

FY 1999 Results FY 2000 Target (Revised Final) FY 2001 Proposed Target

! Reduce routine waste generation by

45 percent based on 1993 waste

generation rates. (Data for reporting

will be available at the end of

calendar year 1999). (EQ4-1)

(UNSPECIFIED)

! Reduce by 10 percent the waste

resulting from the execution of

cleanup, stabilization and

decommissioning activities from the

annual planned baseline volumes. 

(EQ4-1)

(EXCEEDED GOAL)

! Implement projects that reduce/avoid

the generation of radioactive, mixed,

and hazardous wastes by 2,000 cubic

meters. (EQ4-1)

(EXCEEDED GOAL)

! Reduce annual routine waste

generation by 50% by December

1999, based on 1993 waste

generation rates. (EQ4-1)

! Conduct pollution prevention

projects/practices to reduce

waste from site cleanup and

stabilization activities by 10% as

compared to the annual planned

baseline volumes and report the

results achieved through

December 1999 by April 2000.

(EQ4-1)

! Prepare pollution prevention

plans outlining specific strategies

to meet the new Departmental

P2

E2 goals for 30 DOE sites.

(EQ4-1)

! Conduct pollution prevention

projects/practices to reduce

waste from site cleanup and

stabilization activities by 10

percent as compared to the

annual planned baseline

volumes. 

Means and Strategies for Pollution Prevention for

FY 2001: 

The mission of the Departments Pollution Prevention

program are to: (1) comply with waste minimization,

pollution prevention, affirmative procurement, and

recycling requirements under Federal/State statutes,

Executive Orders, and DOE Orders; and (2) reduce

waste generated through implementation of cost

effective pollution prevention projects. The

Department will apply pollution prevention techniques

such as material substitution, process modification,

segregation/reuse, and recycling, where they would not

increase the life cycle cost of the cleanup/

stabilization/waste management projects. 

The Department issued aggressive pollution prevention

goals for FY 2005 and FY 2010 on November 16, 

1999. These goals are to reduce generation of

 hazardous, radioactive and sanitary wastes by at least

80 percent by 2010 or earlier, using 1993 as a baseline,

from its routine operations and achieve a 10 percent

reduction annually for wastes from cleanup and

stabilization activities. Each site will submit pollution

prevention goals by the end of FY 2000. 

Headquarters/Operations/Field Offices will be held

accountable for implementing site Pollution Prevention

Plans. Through an expanded field assessment program,

the Department will measure success through

continuous improvement and trending toward zero

waste generation and emissions.

The measures and performance goals provided in the

table above are applicable to all Departmental

operations. EM will compile and report Departmentwide progress in meeting these performance goals.
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

Environmental Quality 108

Collaboration Activities

< Regulatory Compliance. DOE negotiates and

signs environmental compliance and cleanup

agreements with the Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA) and or the state regulatory agencies,

as appropriate. Key parameters such as required

cleanup levels must be negotiated with the

appropriate regulators and stakeholders for each site. 

< Developing Disposal Options for Mixed LowLevel and Low-Level Waste. The Department has

conducted numerous meetings with state, tribal, and

stakeholder groups to discuss disposal options for

mixed low-level waste and low-level waste prior to

making final decisions.

< Long-Term Stewardship. The Department will

maintain a presence at most sites to ensure that the

reduction in risk to human health and the

environment is maintained. The extent of long-term

stewardship required at a site will reflect the end

state developed in consultation among DOE and

other representatives of the Administration,

Congress, Tribal Nations, representatives of

regulatory agencies, state and local authorities and

other stakeholders.

< Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board (DNFSB)

 EM works with the DNFSB to implement

recommendations relating to activities at the

Departments defense nuclear facilities affecting

nuclear health and safety. 

< Environmental Management Advisory Board

(EMAB)  EM solicits advice and guidance from

the EMAB on a wide variety of topics relating to the

management of the EM program. The EMABs

membership consists of state and local government

representatives, technical experts, and stakeholders. 

External Factors Affecting Performance

< Funding. The site cleanup goals are based on

stable funding. Low funding could prevent site

cleanup goals from being achieved as currently

defined. If this should occur, DOE would work

closely with regulators and other stakeholders to

address compliance requirements and other high

priority activities at sites and to establish appropriate

priorities.

< Cleanup Standards. Decisions made regarding the

extent of cleanup and cleanup levels at EMs

contaminated sites impact the programs cost,

schedule, and scope (i.e., it costs more and takes

longer to cleanup a site for residential use than to

clean it up for industrial development). 

< Commercially Available Options for Waste

Disposal. Accomplishment of the environmental

cleanup objectives assumes the continued

availability of commercial options for mixed lowlevel waste and low-level waste disposal.

< Technologically Available Solutions. The

development and deployment of innovative

technologies will help meet national needs for

regulatory compliance, lower life-cycle costs, and

reduce risk to the environment and public health.

Validation and Verification:

Data

Sources:

Data are based on an aggregation of

Field-generated actual and planned

performance results for EMs

projects. Performance targets were

established based on the FY 2000

Appropriation and the FY 2001

Request. 

Baselines: The Operations/Field Offices

baselines are reported during the

annual update of the Corporate

Database. Planning baselines reflect

cost, schedule, and scope from FY

1997 through life-cycle completion. 

(Life-cycle quantities by PBS are

available from either FY 1997 (i.e.,

release sites, facilities, and canisters

of high-level waste produced) or FY

1998 (i.e., waste, nuclear material,

and spent nuclear fuel) through 2070. 

Because FY 1997 was the year that

EM transitioned to Project Baseline

Summaries (PBSs), quantity

information by project for FY 1997 is

not available for each corporate

performance measure. Where reliable

historical information is available,

pre-FY 1997 performance measure

quantity data are provided at a

summary level only (i.e., not at the

project detail level). 
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

Environmental Quality 109

Frequency: EM collects mid-year and year-end

actual results by PBS for the majority

of the corporate performance

measures. Milestone data are tracked

on a monthly basis. 

Data

Storage:

Data are entered into the EM

Integrated Planning, Accountability

and Budgeting System-Information

System (IPABS-IS) and are

maintained in the EM Corporate

Database.

Verification: The Operations/Field Office project

managers and the EM Headquarters

Site Leads verify and formally

approve the Project Baseline

Summary (PBS) data. Discussions

between Headquarters and the Field

occur on a continuing basis to ensure

the data reported for both internal

management reviews and to meet

external requirements are accurate

and complete. There are also a

limited number of built-in, automated

checks in IPABS-IS that flag input

errors. EM Headquarters distributes

data quality reports to the Field and to

technical and programmatic experts

within Headquarters who are

responsible for reviewing and

verifying the data submittal. EM also

analyzes and verifies performance

results as part of the Headquarters/

Field Management Review process. 

Planned Program Evaluation

The Department evaluates progress and results against

the EM programs performance during monthly

Headquarters/ Field Management Reviews. The EM

corporate performance measures data are aggregated by

Project Baseline Summary (PBS) to the site level, to the

Operations/Field Office level, and to a total EM level,

as applicable, to provide a complex-wide assessment of

program results. At each level of the organization,

performance goals are tracked, evaluated, and

interpreted to determine corrective actions and to assess

areas requiring improvement.
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

Environmental Quality 110

Presidents Budget

Program and Financing

(P&F) Accounts and

Program Activities

Decision 

Sub-Units

DOE

Office

FY 2000

Comparable Approp.

($M)

FY 2001

Request

($M)

050 Atomic Energy Defense Activities

Defense Nuclear Waste

Disposal

Defense Nuclear Waste

Disposal

RW 112 112

270 Energy Supply

Nuclear Waste Fund Nuclear Waste Fund RW 236 326

Total RW 347 438

Program Decision Unit Description:

The Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management (RW) implements the Federal policy for permanent disposal of

high-level radioactive waste and spent nuclear fuel, in order to protect the public health and the environment. The

Department has made substantial progress in characterizing Yucca Mountain, Nevada, to determine its suitability as a

geologic repository site for these wastes. A viability assessment drawing on 15 years of study was completed in 1998.

Based on the viability assessment, the Department believes that Yucca Mountain remains a promising site for a geologic

repository and that work should proceed toward a decision in 2001 on whether to recommend the site to the President. A

draft environmental impact statement was published for public comment in 1999. If the site is recommended for

development as the repository site, a final environmental impact statement will accompany the site recommendation.

Under current schedules, the work to support a Secretarial decision on whether to recommend the site to the President

will be completed in 2001. This decision will consider the views of the State of Nevada, affected Indian tribes, and the

Nuclear Regulatory Commission, as required by the Nuclear Waste Policy Act. In turn, the President will decide whether

to recommend the site to Congress. If Congress agrees with the Presidents recommendation and the site is designated

for continued development, the Department could submit a license application to the NRC in 2002 for construction

authorization. Under current plans, emplacement of waste in the repository would begin in 2010. However, the

Departments schedule remains critically dependent on adequate program funding. Any additional reductions will impact

selected critical near-term milestones for the Yucca Mountain Site Characterization Project, and possibly the planned

2010 waste emplacement date. In addition to budgetary constraints, the Department continues to face substantial

political opposition and legal challenges in implementing its waste disposal mandate under the Nuclear Waste Policy

Act, as amended. 

DOE Decision Unit: Civilian Radioactive Waste Management
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

Environmental Quality 111

Annual performance goals for Radioactive Waste Management:

FY 1999 Results FY 2000 Target (Revised Final) FY 2001 Proposed Target

! Publish a draft Environmental

Impact Statement (EIS). The

Nuclear Waste Policy Act

requires a Final EIS to

accompany the site

recommendation. (EQ5-1)

(MET GOAL)

! Complete repository and waste

package design inputs for use in

total system performance

assessment for the repository

license application. (EQ5-1)

 (MET GOAL)

! Complete peer review of the total

system performance assessment

to provide formal, independent

evaluation and critique. (EQ5-1)

 (MET GOAL)

! Complete public hearings on the

Draft Environmental Impact

Statement which was published

in August 1999. (EQ5-1)

! Select the reference design for

site recommendation and license

application. (EQ5-1)

! Select the reference natural

systems models for site

recommendation and license

application. (EQ5-1)

! Issue a Final Environmental

Impact Statement as required by

the Nuclear Waste Policy Act. 

 (EQ4/FMFIA)

! Complete a Yucca Mountain Site

Recommendation Consideration

Report that will provide the

technical basis for a Site

Recommendation. (EQ4)

! Conduct public hearings on the

Yucca Mountain Site

Recommendation Consideration

Report. (EQ4)

! Finalize a Site Recommendation

Statement for the Secretary of

Energy to submit to the President,

and then to the Congress.

 (EQ4/FMFIA)

Means and Strategies for FY2001:

The Department will focus the Civilian Radioactive

Waste Management Program on the activities necessary

to determine the suitability of the Yucca Mountain site

as a repository, develop the documentation needed for a

Secretarial decision on the Site Recommendation to the

President in FY 2001, and on other activities associated

with the Federal governments waste acceptance

obligations.

Collaboration Activities:

The Department is engaged in continued formal and

informal interactions with the Nuclear Regulatory

Commission, the Environmental Protection Agency, and

the Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board. In addition,

the Civilian Radioactive Waste Management Program

collaborates on technical, policy, and operational issues

with the State of Nevada and local communities with the

State.
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

Environmental Quality 112

External Factors Affecting Performance:

The Programs indicated performance goals and

associated schedules depend heavily on funding

continuity and sufficiency.

Validation and Verification:

Data

Sources:

Internal management reviews and

external peer reviews supplement

technical reports.

Baselines: Program technical, cost and schedule

baselines have been established and

are maintained thru a formal change

control process.

Frequency: Program milestones are tracked on a

continuous basis and formal reviews

of Program activities are held

bimonthly.

Data

Storage:

Data are maintained in published

technical reports, on CD-ROM, and

on publicly-accessible Internet web

sites.

Verification: Internal reviews and external

oversight activities and audits provide

thorough verification of Program

accomplishments and technical

findings.

Planned Program Evaluations:

Complementing external reviews, the Office of Civilian

Radioactive Waste Management conducts bimonthly,

in-depth reviews of Program activities, schedules, and

expenditures. The Director and all key managers and

supervisors participate to ensure that activities are ontrack and within budget.
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

Science 113

SCIENCE

Research conducted through the programs of the Office

of Science (SC) have provided the underpinning for the

successful accomplishment of the Departments

mission (and that of its predecessor agencies) for over

40 years. As one of the core missions of the

Department, the advancement of fundamental science,

the maintenance of large-scale scientific facilities, and

the training of the next generation of scientists is

extremely important and directly impacts the success of

each of the Departments mission areas.

The Office of Science (SC) conducts research at

universities, national laboratories, and private research

facilities in the areas of materials and chemical

sciences, engineering and geosciences, energy

biosciences, magnetic fusion energy, health and

environmental research, high energy and nuclear

physics, and computational sciences. The

Departments cadre of large-scale scientific facilities

support the United States position as the worldwide

leader in science. The broad variety of world-class

facilities such as our large accelerators, experimental

reactors and detectors, high-precision instruments,

synchrotron, supercomputers, high-capacity networks,

and high resolution microscopes provide the scientific

base to support the Nations national security and

energy security interests.

The expansion of the scientific knowledge base, in

addition to the resultant technological advances, justify

the Nations investment in the science programs at the

Department of Energy. These programs provide the

knowledge, techniques, and instruments that are used in

the U. S. programs in national security, as well as,

electricity generation, therapeutic and diagnostic

medical applications, and a host of industrial

applications that contribute to our national prosperity.

SCIENCE GOAL

Produce remarkable insights into our physical

and biological world and the nature of matter

and energy, advancing the basic research and

instruments of science that are the

foundations for DOEs applied missions and a

base for U.S. technology innovation. 

The Science goal is supported by the following four

strategic objectives:

SC1: Fuel the future with science for clean and

affordable energy.

SC2: Protect our living planet with scientific

understanding of energy impacts on people

and the biosphere.

SC3: Explore matter and energy as elementary

building blocks from atoms to life.

SC4: Provide the extraordinary tools, scientific

workforce, and infrastructure that assure our

Nations leadership in the physical,

biological, and computational sciences and

in multidisciplinary research.
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

Science 114

The following table maps the Presidential Budgets Program and Financing (P&F) accounts and program activities to the

Department of Energys offices and decision units. The alignment includes aggregation, disaggregation, and

consolidation. The chart that follows this one shows how the decision units support the Departments Strategic Plan

objectives for this business line.

 Presidential Budget Program and Financing 

 (P&F) Accounts and Program Activities

FY 2001

Budget

Request

($M)

DOE

Office

 DOE Decision Units

 250 Energy Programs

 Science

 High energy physics 715 SC High Energy Physics

 Nuclear physics 370 SC Nuclear Physics

 Biological and environmental research 445 SC Biological & Environmental

 Research

 Basic energy sciences 1,016 SC Basic Energy Sciences

 Office of Advanced Scientific Computing

 Research

182 SC Office of Advanced Scientific 

 Computing Research

 Energy research analyses 1 SC Energy Research Analysis

 Multiprogram energy labs--facility support 34 SC Multiprogram energy labs--facility 

 support

 Fusion energy sciences 247 SC Fusion Energy Sciences

 Program direction 141 SC Program Direction

270 Energy Supply

Technical Information Management 9 SC Technical Information Management

TOTAL - Science 3,160
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

Science 115

Energy

NE: Nuclear

Education

SC4: Science

Energy Sciences

SC: Fusion

Computing Research

SC: Advanced Scientific

Energy Sciences

SC: Basic

Environmental Research

SC: Biological &

Physics

SC: Nuclear

Physics

SC: High Energy

Of Science

SC3: Management

Energy

NE: Nuclear

Management

SC: Technical Information

Energy Sciences

SC: Fusion

Labs--Facility Support

SC: Multiprogram Energy

Research Analysis

SC: Energy

Computing Research

SC: Advanced Scientific

Energy Sciences

SC: Basic

Environmental Research

SC: Biological &

Physics

SC: High Energy

Technologies

SC2: Leading Edge

Energy Sciences

SC: Fusion

Labs--Facility Support

SC: Multiprogram Energy

Research Analysis

SC: Energy

Computing Research

SC: Advanced Scientific

Energy Sciences

SC: Basic

Environmental Research

SC: Biological &

Physics

SC: Nuclear

Physics

SC: High Energy

Science

SC1: Long-term

Produce remarkable insights into our physical 

and biological world and the nature of matter 

and energy, advancing the basic research and 

instruments of science that are the foundations 

for DOEs applied missions and a base for U.S. 

technology innovation. 

Science Goal:

Science goal is supported by four strategic objectives. Each strategic objective is being pursued through long-term

strategies. The Decision Units fund work on those long-term strategies and the annual performance goals are discussed

with the Decision Units on the following pages. DOE Decision Units provide a means to link program resources at

lower levels of aggregation to performance goals. While this approach allows us to clearly link annual performance with

annual budget resources, we are also keeping our strategic plan goals and objectives in focus by annotating each

performance goal with the strategic objective it supports. 
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

Science 116

Presidents Budget Program

and Financing (P&F) Accounts

and Program Activities

Decision 

Sub-Units

DOE

Office

FY 2000

Comparable

Approp. ($M)

FY 2001

Request

($M)

250 Energy Programs

High Energy Physics High Energy Physics SC 704 715

Nuclear Physics Nuclear Physics SC 356 370

Total SC SC 1,060 1,085

Introduction of the Decision Unit:

High Energy and Nuclear Physics programs support basic research that provides new insights into the nature of energy

and matter and operates large world-class scientific facilities for the Nation. High Energy and Nuclear Physics research

is conducted by over 3,000 researchers and over 1,000 graduate students from over 100 universities and the National

Laboratories.

Annual Performance Plan:

FY 1999 Results FY 2000 Target (Revised Final) FY 2001 Proposed Target

High Energy Physics:

! Continue collaborative efforts

with NASA on space science

and exploration. (ST1-4)

(MET GOAL)

! Deliver on the 1999 US/DOE

commitments to the

international Large Hadron

Collider project. (ST1-2)

(MET GOAL)

Nuclear Physics:

! Complete construction and

begin operation of the

Relativistic Heavy Ion

Collider (RHIC) at

Brookhaven National

Laboratory. (ST1-2)

(MET GOAL)

! Move the newly upgraded D-Zero and

CDF detectors at Fermilab into

position in the Main Injector tunnel

and begin commissioning in the third

quarter of the fiscal year. (SC1-2)

! Further the progress on achieving

luminosity and operational efficiency

for the Tevtron at Fermilab in its new

mode of operation with the recently

completed Main Injector. (SC1-2)

! Operate the B-factory at the Stanford

Linear Accelerator Center, the Main

Injector for the Tevatron at Fermilab,

the Thomas Jefferson National

Accelerator Facility, and the

Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider at

Brookhaven National Laboratory, and

deliver on the FY 2000 U.S./DOE

commitments to the international

Large Hadron Collider project.

(SC1-2)

! Continue collaborative efforts with

NASA on space science and

exploration. (SC1-4)

! Make progress on the Neutrinos

at the Main Injector project as

measured by accomplishment of

scheduled milestones as detailed

in the benchmark plan. (SC1)

! Meet on time and within budget

the scheduled U. S. DOE

commitments to the international

Large Hadron Collider project

as reflected in the latest

international agreement and

corresponding plan. (SC1)

! High Energy Physics plans and

research will be recognized as

outstanding by expert advisory

committees such as HEPAP and

through other rigorous peer

review. Additionally, the

scientific results will be

recognized through the awards

received by its researchers and

by the broader scientific

community. (SC1)

DOE Decision Unit: High Energy Physics & Nuclear Physics
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

Science 117

FY 1999 Results FY 2000 Target (Revised Final) FY 2001 Proposed Target

Nuclear Physics:

! Complete construction and begin

operation of the Relativistic

Heavy Ion Collider (RHIC) at

Brookhaven National Laboratory. 

(ST1-2)

(MET GOAL)

! Advance knowledge from

experiments at the Relativistic

Heavy Ion Collider to see possible

evidence of the predicted quarkgluon plasma; a high temperature,

high density state of nuclear

matter that may have existed a

millionth of a second after the

Big Bang. (SC1-2)

! Measure the progress and

success of the Nuclear Physics

program in responding to

priorities and recommendations

contained within the long range

plan of the DOE/NSF Nuclear

Science Advisory Committee

(NSAC) as measures by NSACs

evaluation letter to the Nuclear

Physics program. (SC1)

! Complete fabrication of the

BLAST detector at MIT/Bates in

accordance with the project

milestones. (SC1)

Means and Strategies for FY2001:

The High Energy and Nuclear Physics Program will

support innovative, peer-reviewed scientific research to

advance knowledge and provide insights into the nature

of energy and matter. This program researches the

fundamental forces of the natural world that hold the

nucleus of the atom together, and determine the detailed

structure and behavior of atomic nuclei. The Program

also builds and supports the forefront scientific

facilities and instruments necessary to carry out that

research. All research projects undergo regular peer

review and merit evaluation based on procedures set

down in 10 CFR 605 for the extramural grant program

and under a similar modified process for the laboratory

programs and scientific user facilities, and all new

projects will be selected by peer review and merit

evaluation.

The High Energy and Nuclear Physics Program will

manage its national scientific user facilities to serve and

collaborate with researchers from universities, national

laboratories, Federal agencies, industrial laboratories,

and foreign institutions thus enabling the acquisition of

new scientific knowledge. The program also supports

work at a number of foreign accelerator facilities. The

national scientific user facilities include the new

Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider (RHIC) at Brookhaven

National Laboratory, the Thomas Jefferson National

Accelerator Facility (Jefferson Lab), and four smaller

accelerator laboratories. The Program also supports

other non-accelerator facilities such as the new

Sudbury Neutrino Observatory (SNO), a large neutrino

detector located 7000 feet below the surface of the

earth in Sudbury, Ontario, Canada. The Program

formally peer reviews its scientific user facilities to

assess the scientific output, user satisfaction, and the

overall cost-effectiveness of each facilitys operations

and ability to deliver the most advanced scientific

capability to its user community.

Collaboration Activities:

The Nuclear Physics Program is closely coordinated

with the research activities of the National Science

Foundation. The major scientific facilities required by

NSF scientists are usually the DOE facilities. NSF

often supports the fabrication of major research

equipment at DOE user facilities. 

The HEP Program collaborates with researchers from

many countries. Large numbers of foreign scientists,

who also provide monetary and equipment support,

heavily utilize Nuclear and High Energy Physics user

facilities, including CDF and D-Zero at Fermilab and

the B-factory at SLAC. The Program also promotes the

transfer of the results of its basic research to a broad set

of technologies involving advanced materials, national

defense, medicine, space science and exploration, and

industrial processes. Nuclear Physics user facilities are

often utilized by other Federal agencies (e.g., NASA)

and industry to carry out important studies of the

effects of particle beams (radiation) in a variety of

materials and for diagnostic purposes. The involved

industry or Federal agency supports such studies. 

Hence, Nuclear Physics has extensive spin-off activities
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

Science 118

with other organizations. The Program formally

reviews its scientific facilities annually to assess the

scientific output, user satisfaction, future plans, and the

overall cost-effectiveness of each facilitys operations

and ability to perform forefront scientific research.

External Factors Affecting Performance:

External factors in addition to budgetary constraints

that affect the level of performance on these measures

include (1) changing mission needs as described by the

DOE and the Office of Science (SC) mission

statements and strategic plans; (2) scientific

opportunities as determined, in part, by proposal

pressure, scientific workshops, and Long Range Plans;

(3) the results of external program reviews and

international benchmarking activities of entire fields or

subfields such as those performed by the National

Academy of Sciences; (4) program balance and

relevance, including considerations of activities funded

by non-Nuclear Physics Program sources; and (5)

strategic and programmatic decisions made by nonDOE funded domestic research activities and by major

international research centers.

Validation and Verification:

Data

Sources:

Planning and operations documents

and agreements such as MOUs and

research facility Program Advisory

Committee reports. Annual reports of

facility performance, experimental

and research proposals, and

laboratory Program Advisory

committee reports are reported to

headquarters. Project Management

Plans, external peer reviewer

comments, published scientific papers

and Cost, Scope and Schedule

reviews

Baselines: Baselines and timelines that contain

the milestones, rate of activity,

schedules, etc. of facility upgrades

and projects identified in the FY 2001

budget request and project planning

documents. 

Frequency: The Nuclear Physics Program

conducts a formalized peer review

process for activities at the DOE

laboratories and peer reviews grant

applications as described in 10 CFR

605 on a regular basis - at least once

every 3 years. The HEP projects are

reviewed on a six month basis;

accelerator facilities are reviewed on

an annual basis; university grants are

reviewed at inception and periodically

thereafter, and HEPAP subpanels are

convened on a 2-4 year basis to

examine overall progress and

direction of the field.

Data

Storage:

These documents reside at

headquarters, operations offices, and

at each facility.

Verification: Broad program reviews are conducted

by the HEP program and the HEP

Advisory Panel as well as the Nuclear

Physics Program and the DOE/NSF

Nuclear Science Advisory Committee

on an ongoing basis.
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

Science 119

Presidents Budget

Program and Financing

(P&F) Accounts and Program

Activities

Decision 

Sub-Units

DOE

Office

FY 2000

Comparable

Approp.

($M)

FY 2001

Request

($M)

250 Energy Programs

Biological and Environmental

Research

- SC 426 445

Introduction of the Decision Unit:

The mission of the BER program is to develop the knowledge needed to identify, understand, and anticipate the longterm health and environmental consequences of energy production, development, and use. 

Annual Performance Goals:

FY 1999 Results FY 2000 Target (Revised Final) FY 2001 Proposed Target

! Complete sequencing of 30

million subunits and draft

sequence of 30 million

additional subunits of human

DNA for submission to publicly

accessible databases. (ST1-1)

(NEARLY MET GOAL)

! Determine 70 percent of the

DNA sequence of 10 additional

microbes with potential use in

waste cleanup or energy

production. (ST1-4)

(EXCEEDED GOAL)

! Initiate a new joint Biological

and Environmental ResearchBasic Energy Sciences program

in fundamental science that will

underpin new opportunities and

technologies in carbon capture. 

(ST1-4)

(EXCEEDED GOAL)

! Complete the sequencing of 50

million subunits of human DNA to

submit to publicly accessible

databases in FY 2000. (SC1-1)

! Proceed on the development of the

next generation coupled oceanatmosphere climate model, leading

to better information for assessing

climate change and variability at

regional, rather than global scales.

This next generation model will

change grid size from the current

300-500 kilometers on a side to less

than 200 kilometers on a side

(SC1-4)

! Complete the genetic sequencing of

over 10 additional microbes with

significant potential for waste

cleanup and energy production.

(SC1-4)

! By the end of FY 2001, the

DOE Joint Genome Institute

(JGI) will complete the

sequencing and submission to

public databases of 100 million

finished and 250 million high

quality draft base pairs of

DNA, including both human

and mouse. (SC1)

! Complete the genetic

sequencing of at least two

additional microbes that

produce methane or hydrogen

from carbonaceous sources or

that could be used to sequester

carbon. (SC1)

DOE Decision Unit: Biological and Environmental Research
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

Science 120

FY 1999 Results FY 2000 Target (Revised Final) FY 2001 Proposed Target

! Discover new biological

structures with more than 60

percent of the new biological

structures published in the

peer-reviewed literature

resulting from data generated

as part of the structural biology

synchrotron user station

program. (ST1-5)

(MET GOAL)

! Conduct, with at least 75

patients, Boron Neutron

Capture Therapy (BNCT)

Research Phase I/II clinical

trials at reactor sources with 

neutrons. (ST1-5)

(MET GOAL)

! Complete the initial SC/EM

Pilot Collaborative Research

Program and, in cooperation

with EM, initiate development

of the most promising cleanup

technologies arising from these

projects. (ST2-2)

(BELOW EXPECTATION)

! Develop and implement, in

cooperation with Basic Energy

Sciences, a comprehensive program

within the Climate Change

Technology Initiative where the focus

areas are those that promise the

maximum impact in the area of

carbon management in addition to

supporting fundamental research that

address other diverse aspects of the

problem. (SC1-4)

! Determine the molecular structures of

proteins with more than 60 percent of

the new structures that are published

in the peer reviewed literature

resulting from data generated at

synchrotron user stations by BER

structural biology program. (SC1-5)

! In cooperation with NASA, NSF,

USDA/Forest Service, and the

Smithsonian Institution, provide

quantitative data on the annual

exchange of carbon dioxide between

the atmosphere and terrestrial

ecosystem from 25 AmeriFlux sites

representing major types of ecosystem

and land uses in North and Central

America. Provide data on

environmental factors, such as climate

variation, on the net sequestration or

release of carbon dioxide and the role

of biophysical processes controlling

the net exchange. (SC1-6)

! Continue the Natural and Accelerated

Bioremediation Research (NABIR)

program support fundamental

research in environmental and

molecular sciences that will underpin

the development of bioremediation for

containing hazardous waste and

cleaning DOE sites. Site

characterization of the first NABIR

Field Research Center will proceed,

and activities necessary to enable

research sample distribution to

investigators will commence. (SC2-1)

! Five Intensive Operations

Periods (IOPs) will be

conducted on schedule at the

Atmospheric Radiation

Measurement (ARM) Southern

Plains site. Data will be

obtained from second station

on the North Slope of Alaska. 

The third station in the

Tropical Western Pacific on

Christmas Island will become

operational on schedule and

within budget in accordance

with program plan. (SC3)

! The first Field Research Center

(FRC) for the Natural and

Accelerated Bioremediation

Research (NABIR) program

will be selected at a DOE site

in early CY 2000. Field site

characterization will be

completed and the subsurface

research at the FRC will be

started during 2001, providing

the fundamental knowledge for

development of bioremediation

methodologies for containment

and clean up of hazardous.

(SC2)
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

Science 121

FY 1999 Results FY 2000 Target (Revised Final) FY 2001 Proposed Target

! Initiate a Significant Opportunities

Program in the broader sciences of

global change for outstanding

undergraduate and graduate

students. (ST4-1)

(MET GOAL)

! Continue to make 2 to 10

appointments each in the

Biological and Environmental

Research programs Alexander

Hollander Distinguished Post

Doctoral Fellowship; the

multi-agency SOARS Program

(Significant Opportunities in

Atmospheric Research and

Science) for outstanding Hispanic,

Native American, and African

American students in the

atmospheric and related sciences. 

(ST4-1)

(EXCEEDED GOAL) 

! Continue Atmospheric Radiation

Measurement (ARM)

accomplishments by conducting

five intensive operations periods

at the ARM Southern Great Plains

site. Data will be obtained from

the second station on the North

Slope of Alaska. The third station

in the Tropical Western Pacific,

on Christmas Island, will become

operational. (SC3-1)

! Continue The Global Change

Research Education Program will

continue to support graduate and

undergraduate students

conducting DOE-related global

change research. It will continue

to participate in the multi-agency

Significant Opportunities in

Atmospheric Research and

Science Program (SOARS).

(SC4-1)

! Make 4 to 10 appointments in

both the BER Alexander

Hollaender Distinguished Post

Doctoral Fellowship Program

and the Historical Black Colleges

and Universities Faculty and

Student Research Programs for

research across all areas of the

BER program. (SC4-1)

Means and Strategies for FY2001:

The Biological and Environmental Research (BER)

program will conduct a peer reviewed, fundamental

research program through the Departments National

Laboratories, leading academic institutions, and

private-sector research institutions. Scientific

personnel include biologists, microbiologists,

engineers, and atmospheric and environmental

scientists, as well as the scientific and technical

program managers. The capacity of the DOE

Production Sequencing Facility (PSF) is being

expanded to ensure that 100 million finished and 250

million high quality draft base pairs of human DNA are

sequenced and submitted to public databases. 

Sequencing capacity at either the Institute for Genomic

Research (TIGR) or the Joint Genome Institutes

Production Sequencing Facility is also adequate to

complete the sequencing of two additional microbes. 

The three ARM sites will be operational and the

research personnel, technical support staff, and

equipment are sufficient to conduct the IOPs. The
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

Science 122

selection of the first FRC is near completion, pending

environmental review. Site characterization

methodologies are well developed and will be

implemented quickly with site selection.

Collaboration Activities:

The 1998 DOE/NIH 5 year plan for the U.S. Human

Genome Project was published in the October 26, 1998

issue of Science magazine. It committed to completing

a working draft of the gene rich regions of the human

genome by 2001 and a highly accurate sequence of the

human genome by 2003. Currently 16 centers,

representing the United States, the United Kingdom,

France, Germany, Japan, and China are participating in

the International Sequencing Consortium. Five of the

centers [the JGI/ PSF (DOE), the Sanger Centre

(Wellcome Trust), Washington University (NIH), the

Whitehead Institute at MIT (NIH), and Baylor

University (NIH)] are currently taking responsibility for

more than 80% of the sequencing production. 

Microbial genomics activities are coordinated within

the Department and the federal agencies that participate

in the Climate Change Technology Initiative. The

ARM IOPs include collaborations with NASA, NOAA,

USDA, and NSF supported scientists on aircraft

operations, ground-based instrumentation, and data

acquisition, distribution, and analysis. The FRCs will

provide a unique research field site for collaboration

within the Department and with other federal agencies

(e.g., NFS supported scientists and EPA).

External Factors Affecting Performance:

Achieving the BER performance objectives is

predicated on receiving the requested FY 2000 and FY

2001 budgets. Furthermore, achieving the sequencing

objectives is predicated on the installation of 84 new

DNA sequencers and significant reductions in current

sequencing costs. Both of the reductions in sequencing

costs and the installation of the required DNA

sequencers will be accomplished by January of 2000.

The key external factor that could affect performance is

the price of commercial reagents necessary for

sequencing. Substantial increases in costs of

sequencing reagents above the current levels would

reduce the number of sequencing lanes that could be

run and thereby decrease sequencing output. The trend

in the past has been toward decreased reagent costs

from year to year.

Reduced budgets in FY 2000 will require limiting

operations at the ARM Tropical Western Pacific site. 

The individual research projects at the FRC will be

evaluated for potential environmental concerns. Some

projects may not be initiated pending environmental

review.

Validation and Verification:

Data

Sources:

MOU between National Institutes of

Health National Human Genome

Research Institute and DOE and

planning and proposal documents for

each project

Baselines: Baseline measures are contained in

EA and on the websites for the

projects referred to below

Frequency: The Joint Genome Institute will

conduct periodic progress review and

field research center management will

report to NABIR quarterly with yearly

on site reviews

Data

Storage:

Data stored at websites: JGI web-site

(http://www.jgi.doe.gov/); TIGR

website (http://www.tigr.org/); and

genome database website (http://

gdbwww.gdb.org/gdb/gdbtop.html)

Additionally, FRC data will be

managed by a consortia led by ANL

and LBNL making geochemical,

microbiological, geophysical, and GIS

data accessible by mid FY2000 

Verification: Data availability and publication of

scientific progress will be monitored.

The sequencing data will be entered

in GenBank and can be verified

independently. Program peer review

by Office of Biological and

Environmental Research, evaluation

by scientific community and

publication of the sequence

summaries in journals. Oversight of

the NABIR program will be

conducted by a subcommittee of the

BER advisory committee especially

initiated for NABIR.
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

Science 123

Presidents Budget

Program and Financing (P&F)

Accounts and Program Activities

Decision

Sub-Units

DOE

Office

FY 2000

Comparable

Approp. ($M)

FY 2001

Request

($M)

250 Energy Programs

Basic Energy Sciences - SC 896 964

Introduction of the Decision Unit:

The Basic Energy Sciences (BES) program fosters and supports fundamental research in the natural sciences and

engineering to provide a basis for new and improved energy technologies and for understanding and mitigating the

environmental impacts of energy use. As part of its activities, BES plans, constructs, and operates major scientific user

facilities to serve researchers at universities, national laboratories, and industrial laboratories.

Annual Performance Goals:

FY 1999 Results FY 2000 Target (Revised Final) FY 2001 Proposed Target

! Begin Title I design activities,

initiate subcontracts and longlead procurements, and continue

R&D work necessary to begin

construction activities of the

Spallation Neutron Source. 

(ST3-1)

(MET GOAL)

! Continue construction of the

Spallation Neutron Source, at cost

and timetables as contained in the

Critical Decision II agreement, to

provide beams of neutrons used to

probe and understand the physical,

chemical, and biological

properties of materials at an

atomic level leading to better

fibers, plastics, catalysts, and

magnets and improvements in

pharmaceuticals, computing

equipment, and electric motors. 

(ST3-1)

! Continue Partnerships for

Academic-Industrial Research

where peer reviewed grants are

awarded to university researchers

for fundamental, high-risk work

jointly defined by the academic

and industrial research partners.

(ST1-3)

! Meet the cost and schedule M/S

for upgrade and construction of

scientific user facilities,

including the construction of the

Spallation Neutron Source, by

regular external independent

reviews. (SC1)

! Maintain and operate the

scientific user facilities so that

the unscheduled downtime on

average is less than 10 percent

of the total scheduled operating

time. (SC1)

! Research performed by

investigators in universities and

DOE laboratories will continue

to be recognized as outstanding

during rigorous peer review and

through the awards and

accolades of the broader science

community and others that use

our results as reflected by peer

review comments and annual

awards data collected by the

program. (SC3)

DOE Decision Unit: Basic Energy Sciences
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

Science 124

FY 1999 Results FY 2000 Target (Revised Final) FY 2001 Proposed Target

! Continue fabrication of

instrumentation for the short-pulse

spallation source at the Manual Lujan

Jr. Neutron Scattering Center at the

Los Alamos Neutron Science Center. 

(ST3-1)

! Maintain the high quality and

relevance of DOEs science as

evaluated by annual peer reviews and

advisory committees. (ST1-1)

! Maintain optimum operating

schedules at major scientific user

facilities to serve thousands of 

researchers from universities,

national laboratories, and industry

while operating time lost at such user

facilities due to unscheduled

downtime is less than 10 percent of

the total scheduled possible operating

time, on average. (ST1-1)

! Keep the development and upgrade of

scientific facilities (including

experimental stations) on schedule

and with in cost, not exceeding 110

percent of estimates. (ST1-1)

Means and Strategies for FY2001:

To achieve outstanding recognition, BES will support

fundamental, innovative, peer-reviewed research to

create new knowledge in areas important to the BES

mission, i.e., in materials sciences, chemical sciences,

geosciences, plant and microbial biosciences, and

engineering sciences. All research projects will

undergo regular peer review and merit evaluation based

on procedures set down in 10 CFR 605 for the

extramural grant program and under a similar modified

process for the laboratory programs and scientific user

facilities, and all new projects will be selected by peer

review and merit evaluation.

To achieve reliability of facility operating schedules,

BES will manage premier national scientific user

facilities for materials research and related disciplines

to serve researchers at universities, national

laboratories, and industrial laboratories, thus enabling

the acquisition of new scientific knowledge. These

scientific facilities include synchrotron radiation light

sources, high-flux neutron sources, electron-beam

microcharacterization centers, and specialized facilities

such as the Combustion Research Facility. In

managing these facilities BES established baselines for

all performance indicators for each scientific user

facility using an annual survey tool developed in

collaboration with the facility directors and the facility

user coordinators. An integral part of the survey tool is

an assessment of user satisfaction. BES also began

formal peer reviews of its major scientific user facilities

to assess, in the aggregate, the scientific output and, to

the extent possible, the outcomes of facilities.

To keep within 10 percent of cost and schedule

baselines on the development and upgrade of scientific

user facilities, including the construction of the

Spallation Neutron Source, BES will conduct rigorous

independent reviews using external experts of project

management cost and schedule.
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

Science 125

Collaboration Activities:

The BES program in fundamental science is closely

coordinated with, and synergistic to, the activities of

other federal agencies (e.g., NASA, NSF, USDA, DOI,

and NIH). BES also promotes the transfer of the

results of its basic research to contribute to DOE

missions in areas of energy efficiency, renewable

energy resources, improved use of fossil fuels, reduced

environmental impacts of energy production and use,

science-based stockpile stewardship, and future energy

sources. Hence, BES has extensive collaboration

activities with other DOE programs, and collocates

many of its research performers in national laboratories

with the applied researchers of the DOE technology

programs.

External Factors Affecting Performance:

External factors in addition to budgetary constraints

that affect the level of performance on these measures

include changing mission needs as described by the

DOE and the Office of Science (SC) mission

statements and strategic plans, and scientific

opportunities as determined, in part, by proposal

pressure and by scientific workshops. Additionally, 

the results of external program reviews and

international benchmarking activities of entire fields or

subfields such as those performed by the National

Academy of Sciences and program balance and

relevance, including considerations of activities funded

by non-BES sources affect the performance level of the

program office.

Validation and Verification:

Data

Sources:

The planning and operations

documents and agreements, MOUs,

etc., of BES facilities operations. 

Annual reports of facility

performance.

Baselines: Baselines and timelines that contain

the milestones, rate of activity,

schedules, etc. of the BES facility

upgrades and construction activities

identified in the FY 2001 budget

request

Frequency: BES conducts a formalized peer

review process for activities at the

DOE laboratories and peer reviews

grant applications as described in

10 CFR 605 on a regular basis at

least once every 3-4 years.

Data Storage: All of these documents reside at

headquarters, operations offices and

at each facility.

Verification: Broad program reviews are

conducted by the Basic Energy

Sciences Advisory Committee on

an ongoing basis.
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

Science 126

Presidents Budget Program

and Financing (P&F)

Accounts and Program

Activities

Decision 

Sub-Units

DOE

Office

FY 2000

Comparable

Approp. ($M)

FY 2001

Request 

($M)

250 Energy Programs

Advanced Scientific

Computing Research

- SC 128 182

Introduction to Decision Unit:

Advanced Scientific Computing Research program supports research in forefront and diverse applied mathematical

sciences, high performance computing, communications, and information infrastructure which spans the spectrum of

activities from strategic, longer-term, fundamental research to technology research, development, and demonstration. It

links SC's science programs and laboratories to national economic competitiveness by conducting long-term, high-risk

industry relevant research and development projects in critical technology areas. 

Annual Performance Goals:

FY 1999 Results FY 2000 Target (Revised Final) FY 2001 Proposed Target

! Provide fundamental

research in environmental

sciences, biology,

molecular sciences, and

computational modeling

that will underpin the

cleanup of contaminated

sites. (ST2-2)

(MET GOAL)

! Develop advanced computing

capabilities, computational algorithms,

models, methods, and libraries, and

advanced visualization and data

management systems to enable new

computing applications to science.

(ST2-1)

! Continue to fabricate, assemble, and

operate premier supercomputer and

networking facilities that serve

researchers at national laboratories,

universities and industry enabling

understanding of complex problems

and effective integration of

geographically distributed teams in

national collaborations. (ST2-1)

! Initiate about 7 Laboratory Technology

Research projects that address the

Department's top priorities for science

and technology, through cost-shared

research partnerships with industry. 

(ST2-2)

! Facilities, including the National

Energy Research Scientific

Computing Center (NERSC) and

ESnet, will be operated within

budget and successfully meet user

needs and satisfy overall SC

program requirements where,

specifically, NERSC will deliver

3.6 Teraflop capability by the end

of FY 2001 to support DOEs

science mission. (SC2)

DOE Decision Unit: Advanced Scientific Computing Research
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

Science 127

FY 1999 Results FY 2000 Target (Revised Final) FY 2001 Proposed Target

! Review and select for Phase II funding

approximately 80 Small Business

Innovation Research (SBIR) proposals

that satisfy proof of concept under

Phase I funding. In a separate

competition, select about 200 SBIR

proposals for Phase I funding. (ST2-2)

! Meet 75 percent of the requirements

of computer facilities and networks

users. (ST3-3)

! Continue to make available electronic

journals at the desktop, and

implement tools to facilitate electronic

assess to DOEs scientific and

technical information. (ST3-3)

! Link information resources

throughout the DOE complex to allow

access and use via a single user

inquirer, and capitalize on

bibliographic information and search

tools to facilitate access to full-text

journal literature. (ST3-3)

! Review and select through rigorous

peer review for Phase II funding, 80

Small Business Innovation Research

(SBIR) projects that were

determined to be of the highest

quality and to satisfy proof of

concept under Phase I funding. In a

separate competition, select 200

new SBIR proposals for Phase I

funding. (SC2)

! Conduct regular peer review and

merit evaluation based on the

principles set down in 10 CFR Part

605 for grants and cooperative

agreements, with all research

projects reviewed at least once and

no project extending more than four

years without review. (SC3)

! Support the Computational Science

Graduate Fellowship Program with

the successful appointment of 10

new students to support the next

generation of leaders in

computational science for DOE and

the Nation. (SC4)

! Expand and increase access to

published and pre-printed scientific

and technical information via costeffective, specialized information

retrieval systems resulting in a 25%

increase in users served. (SC3)

Means and Strategies for FY2001:

The Office of Advanced Scientific Computing

Research will support fundamental, peer-reviewed

research to create new fundamental knowledge in areas

of advanced computing research important to the

Department of Energy. To plan, fabricate, assemble,

and operate premier supercomputer and networking

facilities, the program will serve researchers at national

laboratories, universities, and industry, thus enabling

both new understanding through analysis, modeling,

and simulation for complex problems and effective

integration of geographically distributed teams through

national collaboratories.

All research projects will undergo regular peer review

and merit evaluation based on procedures set down in

10 CFR 605 for the extramural grant program and

under a similar modified process for the laboratory

programs and scientific user facilities, and all new

projects will be selected by peer review and merit

evaluation. 

To continue to develop future generations of scientists

with the breadth of skills required to be effective both

in advanced computing research and in interacting with

disciplinary sciences, the CTR program supports the

Computational Science Graduate Fellowship program.

The Technical Information Management (TIM)

program will increase the number of researchers and

citizens served with scientific and technical information
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

Science 128

at a lower cost per person served; lead/advance the

institutionalization of an electronic, decentralized

technical information collection that contributes to the

development of a Virtual Library of Energy Science

and Technology; expand agreements for DOEs

widespread, electronic access to U.S. science journals;

provide more effective mechanisms for public access to

global information; and provide secure exchange and

preservation of 50 years of the Departments classified

R&D information managed by the TIM program, such

as PubSCIENCE, PrePrint Networks, and enhance

delivery of DOE scientific and technical report

literature through an information infrastructure that

uses tools such as EnergyLink, the DOE Information

Bridge, and the Energy Science and Technology

Database.

Collaboration Activities:

The ASCR research program and facilities have been

closely coordinated with the information technology

research activities of other Federal Agencies ( DARPA,

EPA, NASA, NIH, NSA, and NSF) through the

Computing Information and Communications R&D

subcommittee of the NSTC under the auspices of the

Office of Science and Technology Policy. This

coordination will continue in the future through the

newly organized IT Group of Principals and IT2

Working Group, established in response to the

recommendations of the Presidents Information

Technology Advisory Committee. In addition to this

interagency coordination ASCR has a number of

partnerships with other programs in the Office of

Science and other parts of the Department, focused on

advanced application testbeds to apply the results of

ASCR research to mission critical problems in those

areas. 

External Factors Affecting Performance:

External factors, in addition to budgetary constraints, 

that affect the level of performance on these measures

include: (1) changing mission needs as described by

the DOE and the Office of Science (SC) mission

statements and strategic plans; (2) scientific

opportunities as determined, in part, by proposal

pressure and by scientific workshops; (3) the results of

external program reviews and international

benchmarking activities of entire fields or subfields.

Validation and Verification:

Data

Sources:

The planning and operations

documents and agreements, MOUs,

etc. of ASCR

Baselines: Baselines and timelines that contain

the milestones, rate of activity,

schedules, etc. of facilities

operations that reside at

headquarters, operations offices and

at each facility; the BES facility

upgrades and construction activities

identified in the FY 2001 budget

request

Frequency: A formalized peer review process

for activities at the DOE laboratories

and peer reviews grant applications

as described in 10 CFR 605 on a

regular basis at least once every 3-4

years

Data

Storage:

Annual reports of facility

performance and progress data are

reported to, and reside at,

Headquarters, operations offices,

and at each facility

Verification: verification i.e. broad program

review, advisory committee, surveys

etc. - N/A
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

Science 129

Presidents Budget

Program and Financing (P&F)

Accounts and Program Activities

Decision 

Sub-Units

DOE

Office

FY 2000

Comparable

Approp. ($M)

FY 2001

Request

($M)

250 Energy Programs

Fusion Energy Sciences - SC 248 247

Introduction of the Decision Unit:

The mission of the U.S. Fusion Energy Science Program is to advance plasma science, fusion science, and fusion

technologythe knowledge base needed for an economically and environmentally attractive fusion energy source.

Annual Performance Goals:

FY 1999 Results FY 2000 Target (Revised Final) FY 2001 Proposed Target

! Maintain high scientific quality

in the Energy Research

Program as judged by the

Program Advisory Committees.

 (ST3-4)

(MET GOAL)

! Maintain high scientific quality in

the Energy Research Program as

judged by the Program Advisory

Committees. (SC1-1)

! Begin new funding opportunities in

basic plasma sciences and junior

plasma physics facility development

programs provided through

competitive announcements.

(SC1-3)

! Operate a novel magnetic fusion

confinement device, the National

Spherical Torus Experiment, with

0.5 megaampere plasma currents

approaching 0.5 second pulse

lengths and 1 megaampere,

currents for shorter pulses.(SC1-5)

! Make operational three innovative

concept exploration experiments in

fusion science--The LSX fieldreversed configuration and the

flow-through Z pinch, both at the

University of Washington and the

Pegasus quasi-spherical toroidal

plasma at the Wisconsin-- providing

basic scientific understanding of

relevant concept phenomena.

(SC1-6)

! Sustain partnerships that support

fusion/plasma sciences,

specifically through completion

by June 2001 of a new NSF/DOE

Partnership in Basic Plasma

Science and Engineering to

provide continuity after the

present agreement ends, and by

initiating a new element of the

U.S.-Japan collaborative

program by the end of FY 2001.

 (SC4)

! Complete by June 2001 the 6 MW

power upgrade of the DIII-D

microwave system and initiate

experiments with it to control and

sustain plasma current profiles,

with the goal of maintaining

improved confinement of plasma

energy for longer periods of time.

(SC1)

DOE Decision Unit: Fusion Energy Sciences
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

Science 130

FY 1999 Results FY 2000 Target (Revised Final) FY 2001 Proposed Target

! Operate the DIII-D Tokamak facility to

test the feasibility of using increased

radio frequency heating power and

improved power exhaust capabilities to

extend the pulse length of advanced

operating modes, a requirement for

future fusion energy sources. (SC3-1)

! Complete and make available for use via

the web a new energy transport code

framework, based on modern computing

techniques. (SC1-2)

! Initiate and meet schedules for

dismantling, packaging, and

offsite shipping of the Tokamak

Fusion Test Reactor (TFTR)

systems.

Means and Strategies for FY2001:

The DIII-D microwave system upgrade will be carried

out under a contract with private industry. The prime

contractor, PPPL, will manage the decontamination and

decommissioning (D&D) activities and arrange for the

necessary supporting sub-contractor skills. Appropriate

staff of the participating agencies will negotiate new

partnerships.

Collaboration Activities:

Japanese engineers will collaborate with PPPL during

the TFTR D&D. The NSF/DOE Partnership supports

basic plasma physics and engineering efforts through

coordinated review and funding. The US-Japan

collaborative program provides optimum use of

facilities and research staff through coordinated

research activities. 

External Factors Affecting Performance:

The equipment required for the DIII-D microwave

upgrade represents cutting edge technology, which

always presents some risk in implementation. 

External factors which could affect the TFTR D&D are

changes in regulations regarding burial of radioactive

waste.

Validation and Verification:

Data Sources: Progress on the DIII-D microwave

upgrade is described in monthly

progress reports that are submitted

to OFES. PPPL provides regular

reports to OFES, which includes

status reports on TFTR D&D. Data

used for validation and verification

are the D&D project cost and

schedule records

Verification: Participating parties will verify

when signing the new partnership

agreements

Planned Program Evaluation:

The Office of Science obtains validation of the

relevance and quality of its current and new research

efforts through peer review, in addition to the advisory

committees and professional scientific associations

which are involved in providing support and guidance

to the SC programs. The five advisory committees are

composed of industry, university, and government

officials who are qualified in the scientific disciplines

of the program area of the advisory committee. SC

tasks them on various issues to provided advice to

program managers on approaches, relevance of

research portfolio, or strategic planning.
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

Corporate Management 131

CORPORATE MANAGEMENT

The Department manages an extensive array of energy

programs over a nationwide complex including

headquarters organizations, operations offices, field

offices, national laboratories, power marketing

administrations, special purpose offices, and sites now

dedicated to environmental cleanup. The Department

needs strong corporate management in order to

integrate its diverse portfolio of program missions, its

facilities, and its contractors spread over a large

geographic base. 

This strong corporate culture is also necessary to

complement program managers pursuit of program

mission goals. The offices funded under the Corporate

Management goal:

 provide oversight and internal review of policy

issues and budgets, 

 act as honest brokers in decision-making, 

 provide leadership on broad departmental

management issues,

 represent the Department with other Federal

Agencies. 

Corporate Management goal and objectives provide the 

focus for implementing Secretarys initiatives to

improve management and accountability while ensuring

the safety and health of the DOE workforce and

members of the public.

CORPORATE MANAGEMENT GOAL

Demonstrate excellence in the Departments

environment, safety and health; and

management practices and systems to

support our world class programs.

The Corporate Management goal is supported by the

following five strategic objectives. 

CM1: Ensure the safety and health of the DOE

work force and members of the public, and

the protection of the environment in all

Departmental activities.

CM2: Manage human resources and diversity

initiatives and implement best management

practices to improve the delivery of

products and services. 

CM3: Ensure public confidence in the

Departments contractual and financial

transactions.

CM4: Improve the Departments efficiency and

effectiveness through Information

Technology Systems and Infrastructure. 

CM5: Promote the efficient, effective, and

economical operation of the Department of

Energy.
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

Corporate Management 132

The following table maps the Presidential Budgets Program and Financing (P&F) accounts and program activities to the

Department of Energys offices and decision units. The alignment includes aggregation, disaggregation, and

consolidation. The chart that follows this one shows how the decision units support the Departments Strategic Plan

objectives for this business line.

Presidential Budget Program and Financing

(P&F) Accounts and Program Activities

FY 2001

Budget

Request

($M)

DOE

Office DOE Decision Units

270 Energy Supply

Environment, Safety & Health (non defense) 40 EH Environment, Safety & Health

Other Defense Activities

Environment, Safety & Health (defense) 109 EH Environment, Safety & Health

Worker Compensation Activities 17 EH Environment, Safety & Health

 Total Environment, Safety & Health 166 Environment, Safety & Health

Other Departmental Support and Staff Offices

Office of the Secretary 6 S1 Office of the Secretary

Management and Administration 91 MA Management and Administration

Chief Financial Officer (72)* CFO Chief Financial Officer

Board of Contact Appeals 1 HG Hearings and Appeals

Congressional and Intergovernmental Affairs 5 CI Congressional and

Intergovernmental Affairs

Public Affairs 4 PA Public Affairs

General Counsel 23 GC General Counsel

Office of Policy 8 PO Office of Policy

International Affairs 10 IA International Affairs

Economic Impact and Diversity 7 ED Economic Impact and Diversity

Contract Reform and Privatization 3 PC Contract Reform and

Privatization

 Subtotal Departmental Administration 85 Departmental Administration

(DA)

Economic Regulation - Hearings and Appeals 2 HG Hearings and Appeals

Other Defense Activities - Hearings and Appeals 3 HG Hearings and Appeals

Office of the Inspector General 33 IG Office of the Inspector General

Adjustment - FERC (Receipts) (28)

Adjustment - Colorado River Basin (Receipts) (21)

Total - Other Departmental Support and Staff

Offices

74

* Includes adjustment of $128 million for revenues. 
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

Corporate Management 133

Corporate Management goal is supported by five strategic objectives. Each strategic objective is being pursued through

long-term strategies. The Decision Units fund work on those long-term strategies and the annual performance goals are

discussed with the Decision Units on the following pages. DOE Decision Units provide a means to link program

resources at lower levels of aggregation to performance goals. While this approach allows us to clearly link annual

performance with annual budget resources, we are also keeping our strategic plan goals and objectives in focus by 

annotating each performance goal with the strategic objective it supports. 
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

Corporate Management 134

Presidents Budget

Program and Financing

(P&F) Accounts and Program

Activities

Decision 

Sub-Units

DOE

Office

FY 2000

Comparable Approp.

($M)

FY 2001

Request

($M)

270 Energy Supply

Environment Safety and

Health (non defense)

- EH 38 40

Other Defense Activities

Environment Safety and

Health (defense)

- EH 90 109

Worker Compensation

Activities

- EH 17

Total ES&H 128 166

Description of the Program:

The Office of Environment, Safety and Health (EH) is a corporate resource that provides leadership and Departmental

management excellence to protect the workers, the public, and the environment. EH provides corporate policy, guidance,

and technical expertise to support and advise the Secretary regarding the line management implementation of

environment, safety, and health requirements and programs. EH staff is expert in disciplines such as environmental

protection; industrial hygiene; industrial, chemical, and constructions safety; public health; occupational medicine, and

risk management. EH activities funded within the Energy Supply appropriation are concentrated into the following

business lines within one operating decision unit: Policy, Standards, and Guidance; and Corporate Programs. This better

characterizes EH as a corporate resource to advance the DOE mission while promoting the establishment of effective

and efficient environment, safety, and health programs. The EH defense activities are concentrated into four business

functions within one decision unit: Oversight, Health Studies, and the Radiation Effects Research Foundation (RERF)

and the Gaseous Diffusion Plants activity. Exposure Compensation Activities relate to compensation of workers across

the complex for work related illnesses.

DOE Decision Unit: Environment, Safety and Health
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

Corporate Management 135

Annual Performance Goals:

FY 1999 Results FY 2000 Target (Revised Final) FY 2001 Proposed Target

! Implement Integrated Safety

Management Systems in all

major management and

operations contracts.

 (CM1-1)

(MET GOAL)

! Conduct oversight special

reviews, assessments,

evaluations, and inspections

of such topics as emergency

management, safety

management, and accidents.

 (CM1-1)

(MET GOAL)

! Issue an initial status report

on the development of a

public health agenda by

December 31, 1998 and a

final public health agenda for

each site, which reflects

customer and stakeholder

input, shall be issued in

FY 2000. (CM2-4)

(NEARLY MET GOAL)

! Implement Integrated Safety

Management at all DOE

sites.(FMFIA milestone) (CM1-1)

! Prevent fatalities, minimize

serious accidents, and minimize

environ-mental releases at

Depart-mental sites. (CM1-1)

! Conduct oversight special

reviews, assessments,

evaluations, and inspections of

such topics as emergency

management, safety management,

and accidents. (CM1-1)

! Propose legislation to Congress

that would establish a program to

compensate:

S Current and former Federal

and contractor workers and

beryllium vendor employees

who are ill because of 

beryllium exposure; and 

S Certain workers at the Oak

Ridge East Tennessee

Technology Park and the

Paducah Gaseous Diffusion

Plant in Kentucky who have

illnesses associated with

exposures which occurred

during their employment.

 (CM1-1)

! Provide medical screening to all

DE workers formerly exposed to

beryllium during their

employment at DOE facilities 

(CM1-1)

! Develop a stronger, more

coherent public health agenda at

and surrounding DOE sites.

 (CM1-1)

! Accomplish the milestone of the

FMFIA corrective action plan to

complete the nuclear safety

standards upgrade project.

 (CM1-1)

! Measure the effectiveness of 

Integrated Safety Management

implementation by tracking five

complex-wide performance

indicators:

S Total Recordable Case Rate,

S Occupational Safety Cost Index,

S Hypothetical Radiation Dose to the

Public,

S Worker Radiation Dose; and,

S Reportable Occurrences of Releases

to the Environment. (CM1)

! Make biennial presentations of the

results of epidemiologic surveillance

analyses to workers and management

at participating DOE facilities. (CM1)

! Establish a beryllium registry within

one calendar year of release of the

final Beryllium Rule. (CM1)

! Expand public access to the office of

Epidemiologic Studies United States

Transuranium/Uranium Registries

programs reports and information by

linking the Registries Internet home

page to the Office of Epidemiologic

Studies home page. (CM1)

! Identify at-risk worker populations

and employ appropriate mitigation

measures. Continue shift from a

reactive approach to emphasizing

excellence and prevention in

protecting worker and public safety

and health. (CM1)

! Publish 10 interim or final

international health scientific and

technical reports from the RERF,

Marshall Islands, and Russians to

increase our information defining the

relationship between ionizing

radiation dose and its effect on human

health. (CM1)
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

Corporate Management 136

Means and Strategies for FY2001:

The activities performed by business lines in support of

the EH mission are as follows:

Policy, Standards and Guidance activities involve the

maintenance of current, up to-date DOE policies,

standards, and guidance while adopting consensus

standards as they apply to the DOE work environment.

DOE regulatory liaison activities include transactions

and participatory relationships with other regulators

(OSHA, NRC and the States) to accommodate their

identified interest and jurisdiction.

Corporate Programs activities provide products and

support in environment, safety, and health that

efficiently use DOE resources when managed centrally

by EH. Such programs include the Department of

Energy Laboratory Accreditation Program (DOELAP),

the Federal Employees Occupational Safety and Health

(FEOSH) program, and the nationally recognized

Voluntary Protection Program (VPP). Environment,

Safety, and Health Performance Analysis activities

include collecting and analyzing DOE performance

data to support policy decisions and focus limited

resources on the most hazardous vulnerabilities.

Corporate programs also include crosscutting

Department-wide functions such as environment,

safety, and health monitoring; programs directed

toward strengthening safety performance and

incorporating it into the routine of daily work;

communication of environment, safety, and health

program guidance and practices; and lessons learned

and the maintenance of an operating experience

database. Technical Training and Professional

Development provides fellowships and grants to further

disciplines such as industrial hygiene and health

physics and to provide a potential employment pool for

all of DOE.

The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)

Program provides compliance assurance to DOE line

management by supporting the implementation of the

Departments NEPA activities. Information

Management provides for the overall management of

environment, safety, and health data and information

for the DOE complex and other stakeholders.

Oversight activities provide information and analysis

needed to ensure that the Department of Energy (DOE)

and contractor management, the public, the Secretary of

Energy, and the Assistant Secretary for Environment,

Safety and Health have an accurate, comprehensive

understanding of the effectiveness, vulnerabilities, and

trends of the Departments environment, safety, and

health policies and programs. This data and analysis

provide critical information on how effectively line

management is implementing Integrated Safety

Management. The activities to accomplish this mission

include Evaluations, Price-Anderson Amendments Act

Enforcement, and the Departmental Representative to

the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board (DNFSB).

The safeguards and security oversight function has

been transferred to the Office of Independent Oversight

and Performance Assurance.

Health Studies activities include Occupational

Medicine (medical surveillance); Epidemiologic

Studies (surveillance and communication of worker

injury and illness); Public Health Activities (health

studies, health education and promotion, etc., at DOE

sites); and International Health Programs (Marshall

Islands program and health studies in the former Soviet

Union and Spain).

Radiation Effects Research Foundation (RERF)

activities support analysis of the medical effects of

radiation with the intention of contributing to the

maintenance of the health and welfare of atomic bomb

survivors and to the enhancement of worldwide

radiation protection practices and standards.

Gaseous Diffusion Plant activities help to resolve

concerns and issues raised by workers relating to

radiation exposure.

Collaboration Activities:

EH maintains close contacts with private industry,

regulatory agencies, independent standard-setting

groups, and national environment, safety, and health

organizations, and facilitating information exchanges

between DOE line management and their counterparts

in the private sector. EH staff also provide corporate

support to DOE managers in developing improved

strategies for including safety and health in planning

and conducting work; applying regulations (guidance

on Environmental Protection Agency (EPA),

Occupational Safety and Health Administration

(OSHA), the States, and Nuclear Regulatory

Commission (NRC) regulation); and DOE policy and

guidance

External Factors Affecting Performance:

Specific ES&H events, departmental program activities,

and requests from field sites will affect the level and

deployment of EHs resources.
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

Corporate Management 137

Validation and Verification:

Data

Sources:

The field sites provide their

operating data to EHs various

reporting systems

Baselines: Technical baselines have been

established using historical data..

Frequency: Data is updated monthly and

reports are issued quarterly and

annually

Data Storage: Data is stored at various sites and in

EHs data bases, including:

Computerized Accident/Incident

Reporting System, Radiation

Exposure Monitoring System, and

Occurrence Reporting and

Processing System.

Verification: Data entry quality control

procedures have been established

by each EH information system

manager.

Planned Program Evaluation:

An extensive peer and program review process is 

followed to assure that reports reflect the highest 

quality achievable.
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

Corporate Management 138

Presidents Budget

Program and Financing

(P&F) Accounts and

Program Activities

Decision 

Sub-Units

DOE Offices FY 2000

Comparable

Approp. ($M)

FY 2001

Request

($M)

Departmental

Administration

- S1, MA, CFO, CI, PA, HG,

GC, PO, IA, ED, PC

99 85

Hearings and Appeals - HG 5 5

These departmental offices often support the strategic objectives of the business lines and corporate management at a

level below the reporting threshold of this plan. For example, the Office of Contract Reform and the Board of Contract

Appeals both contribute significantly to the strategic objective to improve the delivery of products and services through

contract reform and the use of business-like management practices. However, responsibility for these goals resides in

Management and Administration with the Offices of Procurement Policy and Procurement Operations. The Office of

Economic Impact and Diversity collaborates with the Energy Information Administration to report on the effects of

national energy programs, policies, and regulations of DOE on minorities and minority communities. Examples like

these abound in the departmental offices. On the other hand, many of these offices lead departmental efforts in attaining

our strategic goals. A description of these offices follows: 

Office of the Secretary: The Office of the Secretary provides overall policy direction for the Department of Energy in

fulfilling its mission to foster a secure and reliable energy system that is environmentally and economically sustainable,

to be a responsible steward of the Nations nuclear weapons, to clean up our own facilities, and to support continued

United States leadership in science and technology.

Management and Administration: The Office of Management and Administration provides the Department with the

best value, high quality, and timely products and management services. These products and services are provided in the

areas of administration, human resources and training, procurement assistance, performance excellence, executive

secretariat support, consumer information and aviation management.

Chief Financial Officer: The CFO provides centralized direction and oversight of the full range of financial and

planning activities including: strategic planning and program evaluation; project management; budget formulation,

presentation and execution; Department-wide oversight of internal controls; Departmental accounting and financial

policies, procedures and directives; operation and maintenance of the Department's payroll system and financial

information system/Standard General Ledger; and, financial management (accounting, cash management, and reporting).

Board of Contract Appeals: The Board is an administrative tribunal responsible to the Secretary and under law for the

fair and impartial trail and adjudication of a variety of disputes. With few exceptions, these disputes are related to the

Departments acquisition and financial assistance programs.

Congressional and Intergovernmental Affairs: This office promotes Departmental policies, programs, and initiatives

through liaison, communication, coordination, and interaction with Congress, State, local, and Tribal governments, other

Federal agencies, stakeholders, and the general public.

Public Affairs: Public Affairs communicates information about DOEs work in a timely, accurate, and accessible way

to the news media and the public.

General Counsel: The General Counsel provides comprehensive legal services to the Secretary and the Department.

DOE Decision Units: Departmental Administration & Hearings and Appeals
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

Corporate Management 139

Office of Policy: The Office of Policy leads the Departments efforts to provide accurate and unbiased analysis of

existing and prospective energy-related Government policies, and to assess and respond to emerging threats to the

economic efficiency and reliability of the Nations energy sector. Additionally, the Office lends its analytical capabilities

to strengthen the departments leadership in advancing scientific and technology developments.

International Affairs: The Office of International Affairs formulates and develops international energy policy; leads

the Departments bilateral and multilateral cooperation with other nations and international organizations, including 

participation in international negotiations; coordinates the implementation of international cooperative agreements;

advances energy, environmental, and non-proliferation policies in international agreements; promotes positive

relationships with foreign nations that support U.S. policy goals; and, promotes policy and regulatory reforms in foreign

countries that will remove barriers and open markets for U.S. firms abroad. IA also coordinates DOEs international

energy, science and technology relations with other countries. 

Office of Economic Impact and Diversity: Economic Impact and Diversity develops and executes department-wide

policies to implement applicable legislation and Executive Orders that strengthen diversity requirements affecting the

workforce, small and disadvantaged businesses, minority educational institutions, and historically under represented

communities. 

Contract Reform and Privatization Project Office: This office acts as the principle advisor o the Secretary in the

formulation, guidance, and implementation of the Departments privatization and contract reform initiatives. It also

represents the Department on these matters in dealings with Congress, other Federal agencies, and various stakeholders.

Office of Hearings and Appeals: OHA is responsible for all of the Departments adjudicatory processes, personal

security clearance cases, whistleblower complaints, and requests for information under the Freedom of Information and

Privacy Acts. In addition, OHA is responsible for resolving or adjudicating all remaining matters stemming from the

Emergency Petroleum Act of 1973. OHA also seeks to resolve all claims of adverse impact emanating from the

operations of the Department, including employee claims, public interests, and disputes between offices.
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

Corporate Management 140

Annual Performance Goals for the Office of Management and Administration:

FY 1999 Results FY 2000 Target (Revised Final) FY 2001 Proposed Target

! Improve Federal technical

workforce capabilities at defense

sites by implementing the FY 1999

milestones of the Revised

Implementation Plan for DNFSB

Recommendation 93-3. (CM1-3)

(MET GOAL)

! Improve Federal technical

workforce capabilities at defense

sites by implementing the FY

2000 milestones of the Revised

Implementation Plan for DNFSB

Recommendation 93-3. (CM1-3)

! Improve Federal technical

workforce capabilities through

support of Federal Technical

Capability Panel operations for

activities related to the

Technical Qualification

Program, program reporting

and assessments. (CM2)

! Reduce the Freedom of

Information Act backlog by 10

percent and the average case age

by 10 percent over the previous

year. (CM2-2)

(NEARLY MET GOAL)

! Reduce the average processing

time for Freedom of Information

Act cases by 5%. (CM2-2)

! Implemented a DOE-wide

employee accessible automated

personnel system by December

1998. (CM3-3)

(EXCEEDED GOAL)

! Increase the electronic transfer of 

documents through

implementation of paperless

workflow in CHRIS, reducing

personnel paper transactions by

15 percent. (CM3-3)

! Increase the electronic transfer

of documents through

implementation of paperless

workflow in CHRIS, resulting in

15% of the documents process

electronically. (CM2)

! Conduct self assessments to

measure organizational

performance in the areas of

Customer Satisfaction, Employee

Satisfaction, and the achievement

of Business Results using the

Malcolm Baldrige, Presidents or

Energy Quality Award Criteria. 

(CM3-1)

(MET GOAL)

! Conduct self-assessments to

measure organizational

performance using the National

Performance Excellence

Standard, the Malcolm Baldrige

criteria. Evaluate results,

measure trends and recommend

organizational improvements to

leadership. (CM3-1)

! Conduct self-assessments to

measure organizational

performance using the National

Performance Excellence

Standard, the Malcolm Baldrige

criteria. Evaluate results,

measure trends and recommend

organizational improvements to

leadership. (CM2)

! Convert all management and

operating contracts awarded in

FY 1999 to performance-based

contracts. (CM4-1)

(MET GOAL)

! Convert all M&O contracts

awarded in FY 2000 to a

Performance Based Service

Contract (PBSC) using 

government-wide standards

[FAR, (48 CFR Part 39) and

Office of Federal Procurement

Policy letter 91-2]. (CM4-1)

! Convert all M&O contracts

awarded in FY2001 to PBSC 

management contract. (CM3)
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

Corporate Management 141

FY 1999 Results FY 2000 Target (Revised Final) FY 2001 Proposed Target

! Award 50 percent of all

management and operating

(M&O) contracts, including three

M&O contracts that will change to

Federal Acquisition Regulation

(FAR) contracts during FY 1999,

using competitive procedures.

(CM4-1)

(EXCEEDED GOAL)

! Convert one support services

contract at each major site to

PBSC using the government-wide

standards [Federal Acquisition

Regulations, (48 CFR Part 39)

and Office of Fed Procurement

Policy letter 91-2]. (CM4-1)

! Complete the milestones listed in

the FMFIA corrective action plan

for the Departmental challenge of

contract management.

(CM4-1/FMFIA)

! Award approximately 50% of

service contracts as PBSC using

government-wide standards.

(CM3)

! Continue pilot of Industry Interactive Procurement System at

HQ. Maintain current

availability of procurement and

contracting information for

internal and external customers

with limited enhancements.

(CM3)

! Select and begin implementation

of DOE wide electronic

contracting for large

procurement. (CM3)

! Continue hiring welfare to work

recipients to achieve the

Presidential goal of 55 by FY

2000, 40 of whom will be hired by

the end of FY 1999. (CM3-3) 

(EXCEEDED GOAL)

! Improve workforce skills and

reduce training costs by

implementing the FY 1999

milestones in the DOE Corporate

Education, Training, and

Development Plan. (CM3-3)

(MET GOAL)

! Continue hiring welfare to work

recipients to exceed the

Presidential FY 2000 goal of 55.

(CM3-3) 

! Improve overall efficiency and

safety of aviation services by

conducting a comprehensive

aviation program study by July

2000, including an OMB Circular

A-76 analysis and a cost

effectiveness evaluation; and, by

establishing a review process for

the conduct of charter and

contract aviation services.

(CM3-1)

! Improve workforce skills and

reduce training costs by

implementing the FY 2000

milestones in the DOE Corporate

Education, Training, and

Development Plan. (CM3-3)

! Improve overall efficiency and

safety of aviation services by

conducting a comprehensive

aviation program study by July

2000, including an OMB

Circular A-76 analysis and a

cost effectiveness evaluation;

and, by establishing a review

process for the conduct of

charter and contract aviation

services. (CM2)

! Improve workforce skills and

reduce training costs by

alignment with other Federal

agencies and private sector

organizations by implementing

milestones contained in the

Corporate Training Plan. Revise

Corporate Training Plan and its

milestones to reflect FY 2002-

2005. (CM2) 

! Achieve 90 percent of contract

professionals certified under

DOE professional development

standards. (CM4-1)

! Implement planning and initiate

initial prerequisite courses for

Masters program. (CM3)
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

Corporate Management 142

Annual Performance Goals for the Office of the Chief Financial Officer:

FY 1999 Results FY 2000 Target (Revised Final) FY 2001 Proposed Target

! Identify functional and technical

systems requirements for

developing a Business

Management Information System

(BMIS) with a special emphasis on

financial management, and

develop business scenarios for its

evaluation (a milestone of a

FMFIA action plan.

 (CM3-1/FMFIA)

(NEARLY MET GOAL)

! Complete the development of

requirements and the creation of

a new account structure. 

Purchase commercial Core

Financial System software for

150 users for a pilot

implementation at one of the

three accounting service centers

and two of its satellite sites. 

Begin implementation solutions

for special DOE requirements.

(CM3-1)

! Update and publish the

Departments Strategic Plan by

April 2000. (CM3-1)

! Complete the milestones listed in

the FMFIA corrective action plan

for the Departmental challenge of

CFO mission critical staffing.

(CM3-1/FMFIA)

! Complete the pilot at one DOE

accounting service center,

extend the implementation to

remaining service

centers/satellite offices,

purchase additional software

licenses, purchase additional 

hardware, complete

programming to meet all

statutory and regulatory

requirements, continue

interfaces to other systems, and

conduct training. (CM2)

! Prepare and publish an annual

accountability report that includes

the Department-wide audited

financial statement with an

unqualified opinion to the Office of

Management and Budget by

March 1999. (CM4-1)

(NEARLY MET GOAL: IG did not

give an unqualified opinion on the

financial statement due to issues

surrounding the estimate of DOE's

future environmental liabilities.) 

! Prepare and publish an annual

accountability report that

includes the Department-wide

audited financial statement with

an unqualified opinion to the

Office of Management and budget

by March 1, 2000. (CM4-1)

! Prepare and publish an annual

accountability report that

includes the Department-wide

audited financial statement with

an unqualified opinion to the

Office of Management and

budget by March 2001. (CM2)
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

Corporate Management 143

FY 1999 Results FY 2000 Target (Revised Final) FY 2001 Proposed Target

! Verify progress against established

project scope, schedule, and cost

baselines on projects valued at $5

million or more. (CM4-2)

(BELOW EXPECTATION: Office of

Field Integration responsible for this

goal, was closed out. Beginning in

FY 2000 this function is the

responsibility of the CFO.)

! By April 2000, implement new

project management policies and

procedures that strengthen the

management of projects, and by

July 2000, have new systems in

place to verify progress against

established project scope,

schedule and cost baselines on

projects valued at $5 million or

more. (CM4-2)

! Complete all planned External

Independent Reviews (EIRs) of

projects on schedule, to support

both the needs of the project

managers and timely delivery of

EIR reports, with the programs

corrective action plans, to the

Congress. (CM4-2)

! By April 2001 have all ongoing

projects, valued at $5 million or

more, fully integrated into the

project management policies,

procedures, and systems

implementation. (CM3)

! Complete all planned External

Independent Reviews (EIRs) of

projects on schedule, to support

both the needs of the project

managers and timely delivery of

EIR reports, with the programs

corrective action plans, to the

Congress. (CM3)

! Accomplish the milestones of the

FMFIA corrective action plan for

the Departmental challenge of

project management.

 (CM4-2/FMFIA)

(BELOW EXPECTATIONS: Office

of Field Integration responsible for

this goal, was closed out. Beginning

in FY 2000 this function is the

responsibility of the CFO.)

! Complete four Energy Systems

Acquisitions Advisory Board

(ESAAB) critical actions on

required strategic and major

systems. (CM4-2) 

(MET GOAL: Office of Field

Integration responsible for this goal,

was closed out. Beginning in

FY 2000 this function is the

responsibility of the CFO.)

! Complete the milestones listed in

the FMFIA corrective action plan

for the Departmental challenge of

project management.

(CM4-2/FMFIA)

! By September 30, 2000

reestablish the Acquisition

Executive and ESAAB processes

for use on critical decisions for

projects of $5 million or more.

(CM4-2)

! By April 2001 resolve all

recommendations from the

National Research Councils

report, Improving Project

Management in the Department

of Energy. (CM3)
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

Corporate Management 144

Annual Performance Goals for the Office of Economic Impact and Diversity :

FY 1999 Results FY 2000 Target (Revised Final) FY 2001 Proposed Target

! Enhance Americas science

workforce by ensuring that

minority-serving institutions are

afforded and take advantage of the

Federal Research, development,

education and equipment

opportunities for which they are

eligible and increasing their

awards by 5% over FY 1998.

(CM3-4)

(BELOW EXPECTATION : New

Policy Statement to be issued in

FY 2000.)

! Commit to specific procurement

strategies that will increase the

participation of women-owned

small businesses in the Federal

marketplace through a

Memorandum of Understanding

with the Small Business

Administration. (CM3-4)

(MET GOAL)

! Publish in the Code of Federal

Regulations the DOE MentorProtégée Program. (CM3-4)

(NEARLY MET GOAL: Final action

on the proposed rule is expected in

May 2000).

! Determine how well the

Departments diversity goals are

being met by tracking the

Departments personnel actions

on hiring and competitive

promotions against the current

Civilian Labor Force statistics.

(CM3-4)

! Ensure equitable opportunities

for minority educational

institutions and small, minority,

and women owned businesses to

compete. (CM3-4) 

! Increase employee awareness by

publicizing DOE-wide the scope

of the employee concerns

program, the availability of the

ombudsman function, and the

DOE employee concerns program

offices at the operations and field

offices. (CM3-4)

! Fully implement the

Departments Minority

Educational Institutions

Strategy. (CM2)

! Increase management

accountability in implementing

the DOE Strategic Plan and

Workforce 21, including

producing appropriate reports

tracking DOEs progress in

implementing the Strategic Plan

and Workforce 21. (CM2)

! Achieve the Departments small

business percentage goals 

negotiated with the Small

Business Administration and the

Office of Federal Procurement

Policy. (CM2)

Means and Strategies for FY 2001

Offices in Departmental Administration will continue

to improve corporate systems and procedures that

support the Departments mission and its corporate

management functions. These include streamlining and

improving human resources and training activities. To

promote procurement excellence we will continue using

government-wide standards for Performance Based

Service Contracts, contract out to achieve independence

in project management reviews, and will review and

apply private sector business practices to management

of projects and assets. 

Significant resources will be applied to fulfill the

requirements of legislation including the CFO Act, IG

Act, Results Act, FMFIA, Government Management

Reform Act, FFMIA, Small Business Act, and

Executive Orders to Address Environmental Justice,

Historically Black Colleges and Universities, Education

Excellence for Hispanic Americans, and Tribal

Colleges and Universities.

Collaboration Activities:

These offices represent the Department with other

Federal Agencies including: OPM, OMB, Treasury,

GAO, and SBA. They collaborate with these and other

agencies to fulfill their mutual goals and are subject to

their legitimate oversight.

 
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

Corporate Management 145

External Factors Affecting Performance:

These factors are a combination of the legislation and

executive orders listed above and negotiated responses

to the agencies listed above. Assuming budgeted

resources are available, these offices are not negatively

affected by economic or technology impacts. 

Validation and Verification:

Data

Sources:

Individual Strategic, Five-Year and

Annual Plans; MA Director

Program Reviews, FMFIA and

Field CFO Assurance Letters, IG

Audits, Individual Project Control

Systems, Various Program and

other Mandated Reports.

Baselines: Strategic Plan commitments

Frequency: Annual, Semi-Annual, and

Quarterly Reviews

Data Storage: MA Commitments Tracking

System, Core Accounting System,

Strategic Management System,

Procurement Automated Data

System, Subcontracting Reporting

System, and Diversity Tracking

Systems

Verification: IG, Congressional and Agency

oversight, Internal studies, for

example, Business Management

Oversight Performance Reviews

(BMOP)

Planned Program Evaluation:

DOE uses a process of extensive internal and external

review to evaluate progress against established plans. 

FMFIA reviews of internal controls, Semi-Annual

Reviews of the Annual Performance Plan, Annual SelfAssessments, scheduled BMOPs, the Annual

Accountability Report, and for cause studies when

warranted. This is in addition to regular management

progress reviews of sensitive items.
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

Corporate Management 146

Annual Performance Goals for Office of Policy:

FY 1999 Results FY 2000 Target (Revised Final) FY 2001 Proposed Target

! Work with industry organizations

and government agencies to

establish a comprehensive process

to assess Y2K readiness status,

promote inter-sectoral

coordination, and provide

contingency plans. Provide for

timely communication to the public

of information regarding readiness

status and contingency planning

activities. (ER1-6)

(MET GOAL)

! Complete final preparations for a

smooth Y2K transition in U.S.

energy markets in cooperation

with industry organizations and

other government agencies. 

Provide for timely communication

to the public of information

regarding readiness status,

contingency planning activities,

and real-time performance of the

nations energy infrastructure

during the Y2K rollover. (ER1-6)

! Work with industry organizations

and government agencies,

including the National Petroleum

Council, to assess the impact of

changing market conditions and

regulations on the level and

variability of petroleum prices and

supply, and provide

recommendations to minimize

disruptions during change.

(ER1-6)

(MET GOAL)

! Work with industry organizations

and government agencies,

including the National Petroleum

Council, to assess the impact of

changing market conditions and

regulations on the level and

variability of petroleum prices

and supply, and provide

recommendations to minimize

disruptions during change.

(ER1-6)

! Work with industry

organizations and government

agencies, including the National

Petroleum Council, to assess the

impact of changing market

conditions and regulations on

the level and variability of

petroleum prices and supply,

and provide recommendations to

minimize disruptions during

change. (ER1)

! Enhance electricity sector

modeling capabilities by bench

marking the representation of

transmission system constraints

against models of physical power

flows to better address electric

reliability and economic issues,

and use this enhanced modeling

capability in support of the

legislative process. (ER2-1)

(MET GOAL)

! Use recently enhanced modeling

capabilities to demonstrate the

impact of provisions to address

market power and properly sized

regional transmission

organizations in support of the

legislative process. (ER2-1)

! Continue to enhance electricity

sector modeling capabilities to

better address electric reliability

and economic issues, and use

this enhanced modeling

capability in support of the

legislative process. (ER2)

! Develop a DOE proposal for

guidelines for implementing the

flexibility mechanisms included in

the Kyoto Protocol. (ER4-1)

(NEARLY MET GOAL)

! Support further development and

the adoption of U.S. proposals for

guidelines for implementing the

flexibility mechanisms included in

the Kyoto Protocol. (ER4-1)

! Support further development and

the adoption of U.S. proposals

for guidelines for implementing

the flexibility mechanisms

included in the Kyoto Protocol.

(ER5)
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

Corporate Management 147

FY 1999 Results FY 2000 Target (Revised Final) FY 2001 Proposed Target

! Support quantitative analysis and

international contacts, 

Administration efforts to obtain

meaningful commitments for

reducing greenhouse gas

emissions from developing

countries. (ER4-1) 

(MET GOAL)

! Support through quantitative

analysis and international

contacts, Administration efforts to

obtain meaningful commitments

for reducing greenhouse gas

emissions from developing

countries. (ER4-1)

! Support through quantitative

analysis and international

contacts, Administration efforts

to obtain meaningful

commitments for reducing

greenhouse gas emissions from

developing countries. (ER5)

! Lead the US Government

technology and climate change

strategy development and

implementation through:

S Chairing and expanding the

Annex II countries Climate

Technology Initiative which

promotes the objectives of the

UN Framework Convention on

Climate Change (UNFCCC) by

fostering international

cooperation for accelerated

development and diffusion of

climate-friendly technologies

and practices for all activities

and greenhouse gases.

S Leading and facilitating the

development of US positions on

technology issues in the climate

negotiations including

participation in the UNFCCC

technology consultation process.

(ER4-1)

 (MET GOAL)

! Lead the US Government

technology and climate change

strategy development and

implementation through:

 S Chairing and expanding the

Annex II countries Climate

Technology Initiative which

promotes the objectives of the

UN Framework Convention on

Climate Change (UNFCCC) by

fostering international

cooperation for accelerated

development and diffusion of

climate-friendly technologies

and practices for all activities

and greenhouse gases.(EE)

 S Leading and facilitating the

development of US positions on

technology issues in the climate

negotiations including

participation in the UNFCCC

technology consultation

process. (ER4-1)

! Lead the US Government

technology and climate change

strategy development and

implementation through:

S Chairing and expanding the

Annex II countries Climate

Technology Initiative which

promotes the objectives of the

UN Framework Convention

on Climate Change

(UNFCCC) by fostering

international cooperation for

accelerated development and

diffusion of climate-friendly

technologies and practices for

all activities and greenhouse

gases.(EE)

S Leading and facilitating the

development of US positions

on technology issues in the

climate negotiations including

participation in the UNFCCC

technology consultation

process. (ER5)

Means and Strategies for FY2001:

During FY2001, the Office of Policy will continue to

concentrate on introducing effective competition in the

electric utility sector, strengthening the Nations energy

security, and developing Federal policies that minimize

the costs of achieving National environmental goals

and international commitments to curb greenhouse gas

emissions, while avoiding adverse effects on the

reliability of energy supplies.

Collaboration Activities:

PO coordinates with a broad range of external agencies,

congressional offices, business and non-governmental

organizations via interagency and public fora.

External Factors Affecting Performance:

Industry-specific business conditions, Administration

policies, congressional guidance and NGO issues and

concerns affect the development and deployment of

DOEs positions on varying energy policy issues. 
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

Corporate Management 148

Validation and Verification:

Data

Sources:

Customer and internal staff

feedback

Baselines: Anticipated policy outcomes

against which feedback is to be

measured.

Frequency: TBD based on level of effort and

progress made.

Data

Storage:

PO issues managers and senior

management will develop and

maintain the feedback data on our

progress.

Verification: Anticipate customer surveys and

internal assessment of progress.

Planned Program Evaluation:

PO will use a process of internal and external reviews

and assessments to evaluate progress on these dynamic

and evolving energy policies. PO will document the

number of presentations to public groups on energy

policy issues and measure the number of official

correspondence it has responded to on key energy

policy issues. PO will document the influence of our

analyses within the interagency process. 
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

Corporate Management 149

Annual Performance Goals for the Office International Affairs:

FY 1999 Results FY 2000 Target (Revised Final) FY 2001 Proposed Target

! Continue DOE leadership in

international energy initiatives that

are instrumental in developing,

through government-togovernment efforts, an effective

legal and regulatory framework

for private sector energy

investment and policies to

encourage development of a broad

portfolio of fuel supplies. (ER 1-3)

 (MET GOAL) 

! Continue DOE leadership in

international energy initiatives

that are instrumental in

developing, through governmentto-government efforts, an effective

legal and regulatory framework

for private sector energy

investment and policies to

encourage development of a

broad portfolio of fuel supplies.

(ER 1-3)

! Continue DOE leadership in

international energy initiatives

that are instrumental in

developing, through

government-to-government

efforts, an effective legal and

regulatory framework for

private sector energy investment

and policies to encourage

development of a broad portfolio

of fuel supplies. Examples

include continuing support for

the Hemispheric Energy

Initiative, Russia outreach

activities, Caspian energy

activities, Baltic and Black sea

oil spill activities, IEA Cross

Border Natural Gas Initiative

and developing the Fund for

Energy Sector Initiatives. (ER1)

! Increase U.S. energy-related

business internationally by

removing policy, legal and fiscal

barriers for U.S. companies:

S Implement with other APEC

members and the private sector

initiatives to promote

accelerated investment in

natural gas infrastructure and

trading networks in the APEC

region, including natural gas

and independent power

production;

S Coordinate, in close cooperation

with the program offices, and

with DOC, OSTP, OVP, EPA

and others, energy activities in

support of the U.S.-China

Forum on Environment and

Development, co-chaired by

Vice President Gore and

Premier Zhu Rongji, and the

goals of the joint statement, the

Energy and Environment

Cooperation Initiative; 

! Increase U.S. energy-related

business internationally by

removing policy, legal and fiscal

barriers for U.S. companies by: 

S Continuing to implement with

other APEC members and the

private sector initiatives to

promote accelerated investment

in natural gas infrastructure

and trading networks in the

APEC region.

S Implementing the "U.S.-China

Energy and Environment

Cooperation Initiative"

including coordination of

interagency effort involving

DOE programs, EPA,

Commerce and OSTP to

promote rural electrification,

urban air quality, clean energy

sources, and energy efficiency.

! Increase U.S. energy-related

business internationally by

removing policy, legal and fiscal

barriers for U.S. companies by: 

S Continuing to implement with

other APEC members and the

private sector initiatives to

promote accelerated

investment in energy

infrastructure and trading

networks in the APEC region,

including natural gas and

independent power

production. Conducted

follow-on activities to the

APEC Ministerial;

S Coordinating, in close

cooperation with the program

offices, and with DOC, OSTP,

OVP, EPA and others, energy

activities in support of the

U.S.-China Forum on

Environment and

Development, and the goals

of the joint statement, the

Energy and Environment

Cooperation Initiative; 
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

Corporate Management 150

FY 1999 Results FY 2000 Target (Revised Final) FY 2001 Proposed Target

S Lead a regulatory reform

initiative and undertake the

African Energy Initiative to

promote science and technology

cooperation, and economic -

growth through private

investment in environmentally

sound energy development and

regional integration in SubSaharan Africa, including Ghana,

Nigeria and South Africa;

S Lead regulatory reform initiative

under the Binational Commission

to promote adoption by the

Russian Government of

transparent, fair and consistent

regulations in the oil and gas,

power sectors in order to attract

investment. (ER 4-2) 

(MET GOAL)

! Support non-proliferation objectives

through concluding and the

implementation of scientific and

technology agreements: 

S Geologic research connected to

radioactive waste disposal with

the Russian Ministry of Atomic

Energy;

S Renewal of the existing Peaceful

Uses of Atomic Energy

Agreement and beginning

negotiations for a new and

expanded agreement with Russia;

S Identification of potential 

Cooperative projects for 

Consideration under the U.S.-

China Peaceful uses of Nuclear

Technologies (PUNT) Agreement.

(NS 5-1)

(NEARLY MET GOAL)

S Continuing to lead a

regulatory reform initiative to

promote science and

technology cooperation, and

economic growth through

private investment in

environmentally sound energy

development and regional

integration in Sub-Saharan

Africa, including Ghana,

Nigeria and South Africa;

S Lead regulatory reform

initiative under the Binational

Commission to promote

adoption by the Russian

Government of transparent,

fair and consistent regulations

in the oil and gas, power

sectors in order to attract

investment. (ER4-2)

S Continuing to lead a

regulatory reform initiative to

promote science and

technology cooperation, and

economic growth through

private investment in

environmentally sound energy

development and regional

integration in Sub-Saharan

Africa, including Ghana,

Nigeria, South Africa,

Senegal, Uganda and

Mozambique and follow-on

activities to develop our Africa

Partnership. Lead

Departmental efforts to

implement the Presidents

Council on Science and

Technology (PCAST)

recommendations;

S Continuing to lead a

regulatory reform initiative

under the Binational

Commission to promote

adoption by the Russian

Government of transparent,

fair and consistent regulations

in the oil and gas, power

sectors in order to attract

investment. Continue to lead

the Western Hemispheric

process of developing a vision

of and plans for the regions

energy infrastructure in the

21st century, emphasizing a

government-business dialogue

and partnership. 

(Hemispheric Energy

Initiative). (ER 5)

! Continuing coordination of the

Russian-American Fuel Cell

Consortium (RAFCO) which has as

one of its primary goals, the

opening up of the Russian market to

U.S. manufactured fuel cells.

 (ER 2-4)

(MET GOAL)

! Continuing coordination of the

Russian-American Fuel Cell

Consortium (RAFCO) which has

as one of its primary goals, the

opening up of the Russian

market to U.S. manufactured

fuel cells. (ER 2-4)

! Continuing coordination of the

Russian-American Fuel Cell

Consortium (RAFCO) which has

as one of its primary goals, the

opening up of the Russian

market to U.S. manufactured

fuel cells. (ER2)
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

Corporate Management 151

Means and Strategies for FY2001:

During FY2001, the Office of International Affairs

will continue to expand science and technology

cooperation, and coordinate with other agencies and

private sector stakeholders to advance U.S. energyrelated business opportunities internationally by

encouraging foreign governments to remove policy,

legal and fiscal barriers.

Collaboration Activities:

IA collaborates on its activities with external agencies,

foreign government agencies, international

organizations, congressional staff, business and nongovernmental organizations via interagency and public

fora.

External Factors Affecting Performance:

International political developments and issues,

international energy market conditions, industryspecific business conditions, Administration policies,

congressional guidance and NGO issues and concerns

affect the development and deployment of DOEs

positions on varying energy policy issues.

Validation and Verification:

Data Sources: Customer and internal staff

feedback; program and project

reviews.

Baselines: Anticipated policy, program and

project outcomes against which

feedback to be measured.

Frequency: TBD based on level of effort and

progress made.

Data Storage: IA issues managers and senior

management will develop and

maintain the feedback data on

our progress. 

Verification: Anticipate customer feedback

surveys and internal reviews of

progress.

Planned Program Evaluation:

IA will use a process of internal and external reviews

and assessments to evaluate progress on these

dynamic and evolving international energy policies,

projects and programs.
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

Corporate Management 152

 Presidents Budget 

 Program and Financing (P&F) 

 Accounts and Program Activities

Decision 

Sub-Units

DOE

Office

FY 2000

Comparable Approp.

($M)

FY 2001

Request

($M)

 270 Energy Supply

 Office of the Inspector General

- IG 30 33

Description of Program:

Major statutory responsibilities of the Office of Inspector General (OIG) under the Inspector General Act of 1978, as

amended, are to detect and prevent fraud, waste, abuse, and violations of law and to promote economy, efficiency, and

effectiveness in the operations of the Department of Energy (DOE). In addition to the broad provisions of the Inspector

General Act, Congress, through OIG oversight and other means, is demanding improvements in the Departments

security, intelligence and counterintelligence programs. These concerns add to historic Congressional concerns relating

to major DOE activities, such as contract management, environmental clean-up, project management, and technology

transfer, all of which are reviewed by the OIG.

Annual Performance Goals:

FY 1999 Results FY 2000 Target (Revised Final) FY 2001 Proposed Target

! Render, by designated due date, an

opinion annually on the

Departments consolidated

financial statements, system of

internal controls, and compliance

with laws and regulations.(CM6-1)

(MET GOAL)

! Complete at least 60 percent of the

Audits planned for the year and

replaced those audits not started

with more significant audits which

identify time-sensitive issues

needing review. (CM6-1)

(MET GOAL)

! Complete the required annual

financial statement audits by

designated due dates in the law. 

(CM6-1)

! Complete at least 60 percent of

the audits planned for the year

and replace those audits not

started with more significant

audits which identify timesensitive issues needing review. 

(CM6-1)

! Initiate at least 80 percent of

inspections planned for the year

and replace those not started

with inspections having greater

potential impact. (CM6-1)

! Complete the required annual

financial statement audits by

designated due dates in the law.

(CM5)

! Complete at least 60 percent of

the audits planned for the year

and replace those audits not

started with more significant

audits which identify timesensitive issues needing review.

(CM5)

! Initiate at least 80 percent of

inspections planned for the year

and replace those not started

with inspections having greater

potential impact. (CM5)

DOE Decision Units: Office of the Inspector General
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

Corporate Management 153

FY 1999 Results FY 2000 Target (Revised Final) FY 2001 Proposed Target

! Focus investigations on allegations

of serious violations of Federal law

by:

S Obtaining judicial and/or

administrative action on 30

percent of all cases in open status

during the fiscal year;

S Obtaining acceptance of 75

percent of the cases presented for

prosecution. (CM6-1)

(MET GOAL)

! Plan and, on a timely basis, conduct

reviews based on assessment of risk

and/or benefit to key Department

programs. (CM6-1)

(MET GOAL)

! Obtain judicial and/or

administrative action on at least

35 percent of all cases

investigated during the fiscal

year. (CM6-1)

! Obtain at least 75 percent

acceptance rate on criminal and

civil cases formally presented

for prosecutorial consideration.

(CM6-1)

! Obtain judicial and/or

administrative action on at least

35 percent of all cases

investigated during the fiscal

year. (CM5)

! Obtain at least 75 percent

acceptance rate on criminal and

civil cases formally presented

for prosecutorial consideration.

(CM5)

! Assess adequacy of contractor

internal audit staffing. (FMFIA

milestone) CM5/FMFIA)

Means and Strategies:

The OIG plans its audit, investigation and inspection

workloads by focusing on the issues that are critical. 

Examples of the most critical issues are as follows:

S Intelligence/Counterintelligence

S Safeguards and Security

S Contract/Grant Administration

S Program Management and Operations

S Environment, Safety, and Health

S Infrastructure

S Financial Management 

S Administrative Safeguards

S Information Technology Management

External Factors Affecting Performance:

A number of key external factors affect the

achievement of OIG goals and objectives. These

factors have significant impact on assigning workload,

formulating budgets, assessing organizational structure,

evaluating procedures and establishing priorities.

S Performing annual financial statement audits

required by the Chief Financial Officers (CFO) Act

of 1990 and the Government Management Reform

Act (GMRA) of 1994. 

S Reviewing the Departments implementation of the

Government Performance and Results Act of 1993.

S Reviewing employee whistle blower reprisal

complaints made pursuant to Section 6006 of the

Federal Acquisition Streamlining Act of 1994, and

the Intelligence Community Whistleblower Act of

1998.

S Auditing the operation of the value-engineering

program in the Department required by OMB

Circular 131.

S Reporting to the Intelligence Oversight Board

required by Executive Order 12863, Presidents

Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board at least

quarterly and as necessary or appropriate, and

performing reviews to ensure the Departments

intelligence activities are conducted in accordance

with existing requirements as required by Executive

Order 12333, United States Intelligence Activities.

S Auditing the Departments Working Capital Fund

required by appropriations report language.

S Responding to Departmental Priority Requests

which can be resource intensive.
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

Corporate Management 154

S Answering congressional inquiries, which are often

unanticipated, require immediate attention, and

consume significant resources.

S Conducting joint reviews with other Federal

agencies, the number of which are expected to

increase in future years. 

S Testifying at congressional hearings. 

S Assisting the Justice Department in highly resourceintensive Qui Tam cases.

Validation and Verification:

Data

Sources:

Semiannual Report to Congress, 

Inspector General Act of 1978, as

amended, CFO Act

Frequency: Semiannually and Annually

Data Storage: OIG Tracking System

Verification: OIG and DOE Annual Performance

Reports

Planned Program Evaluation:

S Organizational Self-Assessment Report

S OIG Semiannual Report to Congress

S DOE and OIG Annual Performance Reports
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

Appendix A, Page A1 

APPENDIX A

Criteria for Annual Performance Plan Performance Measures & Goals

The following criteria guide the development of annual performance measures & targets: 

PRESIDENTIAL (1) a significant budgetary obligation, (2) White House interest has been demonstrated,

or (3) there is Secretarial intent to raise to it to the Presidential level.

SPECIFIC Plainly state precisely what will be done in this fiscal year. 

QUANTIFIED Clearly state the measurement and target level of performance. Naked percentages are

too vague without specifying the base--instead, state the from and to levels with an

optional percentage.

MEANINGFUL Each commitment must provide a context, and stand alone without knowledge of last

year's Agreement or Plan or our performance results to link the measures to the

commitment statement. Why it will be done, i.e., the purpose or planned outcome. The

"so as to ..." should be clear for each measure. 

STRETCHINGShould have 80% confidence in meeting target during the fiscal year. Higher confidence is

under committing--lower percentages are over committing.

CONCISE Statements of commitments and measures should be short, direct, and to the point. A

commitment with measures should be between 5 and 25 lines (i.e., 30 to 125 words).

Explanations should not be included. The object is to produce an Agreement that is short

enough that it would actually be read.

WRITTEN FOR Written in common language and requiring only a newspaper article level of

TAXPAYERS knowledge of DOE and world events.

COVERING The overall Agreement must reasonably represent the whole of the resources we are

entrusted to apply to the Department's mission in this fiscal year.

AUDITABLE Each success measure should be based on factual information, so that the IG and/or GAO

will be satisfied if they were to do an audit. 
Department of Energy Annual Performance Plan for FY 2001

Appendix A, Page A2 

DOE Office Designations:

CI Congressional & Intergovernmental Affairs

CN Counterintelligence

CR Chief Financial Officer

DP Defense Programs

ED Economic Impact & Diversity

EE Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy

EH Environment, Safety & Health

EIA Energy Information Administration

EM Environmental Management

FE Fossil Energy

FERC Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

GC General Counsel

HG Hearings and Appeals

IA International Affairs

IG Inspector General

IN Intelligence

MA Management and Administration

MD Fissile Materials Disposition

NE Nuclear Energy, Science & Technology

NN Nonproliferation & National Security

NR Naval Reactors

OA Independent Oversight and Performance Assurance

PA Public Affairs

PC Privatization and Contract Reform

PO Policy and International Affairs

PMAs Power Marketing Administrations

RW Civilian Radioactive Waste Management

S1 Secretarys Office

SC Science (formerly Energy Research)

SO Security and Emergency Operations

WT Worker & Community Transition