DOE, Office of Inspector General

March 20, 2012 

 

Our review found that EM had implemented a risk-based process to manage and plan for declining budget allocations that incorporates the myriad factors that must be considered in making difficult budgetary decisions. The overall budget planning process, as implemented within EM, prioritized the cleanup work in a manner designed to achieve the greatest risk reduction associated with wastes containing the highest concentrations of radionuclides. However, risk was not the only factor that led to the ultimate funding decisions. For instance, there were approximately 37 cleanup agreements with Federal and state regulators that had to be considered during the budget planning process.

 

EM's budget formulation and allocation process was based on site needs and requirements. Specifically, Headquarters' annual budget guidance required each field site to develop a site-specific Integrated Priority List (IPL) ranking the site's projects based on specific risk factors and regulatory considerations for funding purposes. Given funding limitations, the IPL established the priority for funding EM projects. Ultimately, we found that EM Headquarters' final budget decisions were either consistent with IPL estimates, or deviations from priorities at the site level were adequately justified. Consequently, EM's budget decisions reportedly allowed it to meet 173 of 179 (97 percent) of the major enforceable milestones established for FY 2011 related to its cleanup mission.

 

We believe that although EM's current annual budget planning process appeared to be adequate to address the nearly five percent decline in budget allocations that we tested, more extensive reductions could put future regulatory and agreement milestones at risk. Given the current widespread calls for dramatic reductions in Federal spending, it is possible that the process currently in place that is based on site needs and requirements may lead to an increase in missed regulatory and agreement milestones as budget allocations are further reduced across the complex. We noted that to address such shortfalls, our report on Management Challenges at the Department of Energy - Fiscal Year 2012 (DOE/IG-0858, November 2011), suggested that the Department may need to revise its current environmental remediation strategy and instead address environmental concerns on a national, complex-wide risk-driven basis. No recommendations were made in this report.