On January 30, the U.S. Department of Energy's Environmental Management program reaffirmed its commitment to deploying cleanup technologies at DOE sites and began developing a strategy to make deployment a reality. Representatives of the EM program appeared before the Environmental Management Advisory Board to allay concerns about barriers to technology development and implementation. Clyde Frank and Jim Owendoff, respective heads of the Office of Science and Technology (EM-50) and Environmental Restoration (EM-40), briefed the board on their offices' activities to develop and implement remediation technologies.
During his briefing, Frank identified ten technologies that show promise of reducing cost, reducing risk, or of doing something that previously couldn't be done. Frank also presented implementation plans for the identified technologies. Owendoff said improvement is needed in the way innovative technologies are infused into the EM program. The current process is to screen technologies as they move through the process of bench-scale development, pilot-scale testing, demonstration, and full-scale application.
Following Frank's and Owendoff's presentations, discussion centered around acceptance of technologies at the various sites; technology transfer between sites and to the private sector; and barriers to commercialization, such as labor agreements, DOE bureaucracy, and communication problems.
On the issue of making good matches between available innovative technologies and particular site problems, Community Leaders Network member Roy Mink wrote in his trip report, "Clyde Frank mentioned he thought the issue could be solved by DOE's putting out performance bid specifications and letting industrial developers bid on the project using technologies they feel will work." Performance-based contracting would allow flexibility in selecting either lab-developed or industry-developed technologies. The decision would be based on the technologies best meeting DOE's specifications.
Mink reported, "Attendees agreed it was necessary to look at the technologies and specific site-by-site needs, then design the program to a performance-based concept rather than a technology screening concept. This will require full cooperation of stakeholders, the regulating community, and laboratories. Data must be accessible to all parties, federal and state agencies, laboratories, industry, and stakeholder groups." Implementation would be served by encouraging firms with tested technologies to respond to solicitations. The burden of proof would rest on developers to present evidence of the suitability of their technologies to meet explicit needs.
Before the meeting was adjourned, Frank and Owendoff agreed to jointly explore by March 1 contracting methods to move the program into a performance-based environment. As Mink observed, CLN and other stakeholder groups can play a part in "reviewing and offering suggestions relating to the performance-based criteria as they are developed. This will bring forth concerns early in the process so both the labs and interested industry can infuse stakeholder concerns and expectations into their technologies."
