Interesting People mailing list archives
IEEE-USA ELECTRONIC INFORMATION BULLETIN
From: David Farber <farber () central cis upenn edu>
Date: Thu, 2 Feb 1995 15:17:17 -0500
IEEE-USA ELECTRONIC INFORMATION BULLETIN No. 95-5, February 2, 1995 PUBLIC COMMENT SOUGHT ON GALVIN COMMISSION REPORT ON FUTURES FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NATIONAL LABORATORIES The Secretary's Energy Advisory Board (SEAB) of the U.S. Department of Energy has invited public comment by February 15th on the just released Report of the Task Force on Alternatives Futures for the Department of Energy National Laboratories. Comments will be considered and a revised report presented to Secretary of Energy Hazel O'Leary at the end of February and hence to the President's National Science and Technology Council in March. The Task Force was established by Secretary O'Leary in February 1994 and asked to development recommendations on new missions for the DOE National Laboratories and how the Laboratories can best be utilized to meet future national needs. Encompassed within the Task Force report are the Argonne National Laboratory, Brookhaven National Laboratory, the Idaho National Engineering Laboratory, Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Los Alamos National Laboratory, the National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, the Pacific Northwest Laboratory, and the Sandia National Laboratory. Chaired by Robert Galvin of Motorola Corporation, the Task Force is also popularly known as the "Galvin Commission." Among the major findings of the Task Force report: On the Role and Importance of the Labs: "The laboratories' research role is a part of an essential, fundamental cornerstone for continuing leadership by the United States....We note that many of the least exploited investigative paths involve the need for extraordinarily sophisticated multidisciplinary teams using sophisticated instruments and tools. It is that role for which the national laboratories are uniquely qualified. It is the case for--the justification of--the existence of the DOE laboratories." (p. 3). On New Laboratory Missions: "While the Task Force supports innovative application of the national laboratories' core technical competencies (for example, high performance computation, advanced materials, energy technologies, and systems engineering) to new problem areas, these activities should be carefully managed, are not likely to evolve into 'new missions' per se, and should not be a license to expand into areas of science and technology which already are being addressed effectively or more appropriately by other Research and Development (R&D) performers in government, academia and the private sector." (p. 4). On the State of the Labs: "The Task Force observed multiple symptoms of institutional stress at the national laboratories, including the following: increasing overhead cost, poor morale and gross inefficiencies as a result of overly prescriptive Congressional management and excessive oversight by the Department; inordinate internal focus at every level of these laboratories on compliance issues and questions of management processes, which takes a major toll on research performance; excessive scrambling by the laboratories to establish programmatic activities in 'new mission' areas, at the expense of disciplined focus on traditional assignments in national security, energy, waste management and environmental quality, and fundamental science; confusion regarding the appropriate character, scope, and scale of laboratory collaborations with the private sector, due to a lack of clear policy guidance from the Department; institutional fragmentation as a direct reflection of segmented management of the laboratories by the Department, which treats the laboratories not as integrated institutions--let alone a system of laboratories--but rather as a conglomerate of hundreds of individual projects, each of which has a program manager with independent influence on elements of the laboratories; financial and institutional burdens on the laboratories as the result of an apparent inability by the Department either to downsize facilities which have excess capacity or to terminate programs which provide neither distinctive nor essential contributions to the national research and development enterprise; and management systems at the laboratories that do not exhibit best business practices, and thus compound the management challenges of these complex institutions." (pp. 6-7). On the Relationship of Labs to Industry and Universities: "The Task Force does believe that the national laboratories serve a distinct role in conducting long-term, often high-risk R&D, frequently through the utilization of capital intensive facilities which are beyond the financial reach of industry and academia, and generally through the application of multidisciplinary teams of scientists and engineers. We believe that an appropriate division of labor among the national laboratories, industrial research institutions, and research universities can be established but does not sufficiently now exist." (p. 4). On Laboratory Governance: "Our study revealed a counterproductive federal system of operation (Department, Contractor, Laboratory and substantially driven by Congressional policies). A far-less- federal system must be authorized by the Congress, adopted by the Department and implemented at the laboratories, possibly involving contractors." (p. 7). "For those without lengthy associations with the Department or its laboratories--which was the case for a majority of the Task Force members--it is hard to reach any other conclusion other than that the current system of governance of these laboratories is broken and should be replaced with a bold alternative. The Task Force seeks not to be bold for boldness sake, but because it believes that a far more effective system of governance is necessary." (p. 8). On Configuration of the Laboratories: "The Task Force believes that the national laboratory system is oversized for its current mission assignments...The Task Force believes that the national laboratory system serves many vital functions, but that the system could be productively downsized (or 'rightsized') through the elimination of functions and redundancies. The Task Force further believes that one goal of any downsizing should be enhanced focus on specific mission assignments. Through downsizing, there may be opportunities in the future to convert one or more multi-program laboratories into institutions dedicated to only one primary mission...While the Task Force does not make any recommendations about the possible closure of specific laboratories, we have a general view that all of the national laboratories should be subjected to a regular process of comparative validation against other research performers (including against each other) to judge options for closure, consolidation, and even expansion of programmatic activities and facilities." (p. 10). Secretary of Energy O'Leary issued an initial statement commending the Task Force report, which she states "clearly and forcefully validated the importance of the major R&D missions of the Department and its laboratories." She noted that "the Task Force makes a persuasive case that the laboratories, working with the Department, should sharpen their strategic focus on areas of established excellence, and not venture off in search of major new missions. The general message is that federal institutions must borrow a page from the private sector, where companies are achieving major performance improvements by consolidating around their essential strengths." A summary of the Report's recommendations (pp. 63-66 of the report) can be obtained by e-mail request to c.brantley () ieee org. The full report (76 pages) can be obtained from the Department of Energy's Public Information Office at (202) 586-4670 or from your local Government Printing Office outlet or University Government Documents Depository. Although not available electronically on the date of release, Internet users may also wish to check for the report in DOE information on Fedworld or in the Interactive Citizen's Handbook (http://www.whitehouse.gov) on the World Wide Web. Public comments may be submitted until February 15, 1995, to the attention of Dr. Michele Donovan, Secretary of the Energy Advisory Board, U.S. Department of Energy, Room 8E-050, Washington, DC 20585. ------- This electronic bulletin is provided as part of an on-going effort by IEEE's United States Activities Board to apprise IEEE members of important developments related to U.S. technology and career- related policy issues. Please feel free to post this message and/or forward it to other individuals who you believe would be interested. Contact: Chris J. Brantley Manager, Government Activities Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers - United States Activities 1828 L Street, N.W., Suite 1202 Washington, DC 20036-5104 Email: c.brantley () ieee org Phone: 202-785-0017 ====END OF ITEM====
Current thread:
- IEEE-USA ELECTRONIC INFORMATION BULLETIN David Farber (Feb 02)