FY2019 EFCOG Working Group Chair Meeting

1. Project Delivery Working Group FY2019 EFCOG Working Group Chair Meeting Amy BascheMission Support Alliance Working Group Chair June 4, 2019

2. Bottom Line Up Front • PDWG organization optimized to reflect customer emphasis on project management focus • PDWG activities are consistent with Annual Work Plan • Hanford “Face-to-Face” PM Lessons Learned Meeting • Emerging activities directly support customer initiatives: • Arizona State University EVMS Maturity Study (2019 - 2022) • EIA 748 Revision D to E (2019 - 2022) • 413 tailoring (2019 - 2020) • Project Management Work Shop Success • PDWG Award Recipients

3. PDWG Mission and Scope • Leverage expertise and experience of U.S. Department of Energy contractors to address DOE challenges • Achieve improvements in project delivery across the DOE complex • Seek out, promote and share the best practices and processes for successful project delivery • Promote open communication and collaboration with our EFCOG Partners in DOE and peer contractors • Provide DOE access to a network of subject matter experts • Identify opportunities to save and/or avoid costs

4. Working Group LeadershipMember Contribution is Key!!!

5. DOE Project Management Workshop April 23-24 • Participants attended and presented four (4) presentations at this years workshop: • “Developing an Effective Integrated Master Schedule” – Derek Lehman • “Project Management Institute Standard for Earned Value Management – an overview” - John Post • “CACRAC (Current, Accurate, Complete, Repeatable, Auditable, and Compliant)” – Craig Hewitt • WRPS “Self-Governance” – Tony Spillman

6. ASU EVMS Maturity Study Rating Index – May 8 and 9 • “Improving the Reliability of Earned Value Management” • A genuine collaborative partnership by Government and Industry • Sponsored by PM-30 • Chaired by Mel Frank (PM-30) and Amy Basche (Vice Chair) EFCOG • 3-year commitment • Multiple Agencies & Organizations: • DOE / DoD / NASA / NRO / DCMA / CAIWG / EFCOG / NDIA • Kick-off Meeting May 8th and 9th at ASU

7. ASU EVMS Core Team

8. ASU EVMS Maturity Study Rating Index – May 8 and 9

9. Hanford “Face To Face”PDWG Meeting – May 14 & 15 Day 1 – 36 attendees • Hanford Contractors hosted a PDWG Meeting with a Project Manager “Lessons Learned” theme • Project Managers shared their lessons learned for each project • Tours/PM’s included: • 324 Mock Up - Mike Douglas • MASF - Sludge Treatment Project Mock Up - Gary Hofferber • PUREX Tunnel - Andre Labonty • 200 West Pump and Treat - N/A • T Plant Roadside – Ray Geimer • PFP Roadside - Jason Casper • K Area Sludge Treatment - Tarik Dillsi • Manhattan Project National Historical Park's B Reactor - Docent • Veolia - Horn Rapids Site - Ron Mitchell

10. Hanford PDWG “Face To Face”B-Reactor

11. Tour Map Hanford Site Occupies 586 sq miles

12. Hanford “Face To Face”PDWG Meeting – May 14 & 15 Day 2 - 51 attendees • Briefing on Bias Management – M. Delong/J.Ramirez • Improve Planning and Forecasting, and ReduceRisk, Using Behavioral Science to Mitigate Bias • Gathered information from Industry and Academia beyond DOE • Identified and reviewed current Bias literature • Identified and defined types of bias • Developed recommendations and identified tools for avoiding bias • Concluded that planning, estimating and general decision-making is enhanced with an awareness of the types of bias that can aberrate judgement. • Next step is to pilot and demonstrate the added value

13. Hanford “Face To Face”PDWG Meeting – May 14 & 15 Day 2 – cont’d • End State Contracting Model – Step 2 – Ben Lindholm • Step 2 – Transition of the new contractor through the issuance of Pre-Award Task Orders and all subsequent Post Award ESC Task Orders • Step 2a – Initial Contract Transition after Award of new Contract and issuance of remaining Year 1 Task Orders (i.e. Balance of Work (BOW) and Non-Fee bearing Task Orders (Pension, Government Furnished costs, Benefits, etc.)) • Step 2b – After Initial Contract Transition through issuance of all Post Award ESC Task Orders of the new Contract Period of Performance (POP) • Allows effective partnering - Agree on scope, schedule, and cost • Determine Ownership of risk and mitigation strategies • Develop completion criteria and incentive fee structure • Encourages profit sharing

14. Hanford “Face To Face”PDWG Meeting – May 14 & 15 • Subgroup Breakout Sessions • Project Management • Reviewed and discussed GAO-19-223 Report on “DOE Could Improve Program and Project Management by Better Classifying Work and Following Leading Practices” – Issued February 2019 • Why GAO Did This Study: • EM’s mission is to complete the cleanup of nuclear waste at 16 DOE sites and to work to reduce risks and costs within its established regulatory framework • GAO was asked to examine EM’s operations activities…(1) how EM manages its cleanup work and (2) the extent to which EM’s cleanup policy follows selected leading practices for program and project management • EM’s cleanup policy does not follow any of 9 selected program management leading practices or 9 of 12 selected project management leading practices • GAO made several recommendations, including that EM (1) establish cleanup work classification requirements and (2) revise its cleanup policy to follow program and project management leading practices. DOE generally agreed with GAO’s recommendations

15. Hanford “Face To Face”PDWG Meeting – May 14 & 15 • What GAO Found

16. Hanford “Face To Face”PDWG Meeting – May 14 & 15 • Subgroup Breakout Sessions • Project Controls • Management Reserve – Appropriate Uses • Alternative approach to full rigor/discipline of EVMS implementation • Established a 5-member task team to consider how this might be accomplished • Acquisitions • Membership now ~15-20 including SC/EM • Looking for NNSA representation • Promulgating information exchanges on ESCM – Step 2 • Contract Requirements Change Process Best Practice • Risk Management • Use of MR and Schedule Reserve-Being published as a best practice • Managing Reserve in FAR-Based Proposals • Guidance Gap Identification

17. Project Peer Reviews • Supported EVMS Reviews: • WIPP (December 2018) • PORTS (completed) • WTP (June 2019) • MSTS (2020) • SPR LE2 (2020) • Los Alamos (2020)

18. 2019 Annual Work Plan Status • No issues to report with the 2019 AWP = Complete = Ongoing

19. 2019 Annual Work Plan Status • No issues to report with the 2019 AWP = Complete

20. 2020 Potential Strategic Initiatives • Reduce the EM Footprint on the GAO “High Risk List” • Work with DOE to establish specific EFCOG support • Best Practice on Use of project “Mock-ups” • Solicit white papers from the EFCOG community to support a Best Practice • 413 Tailoring • Provide Hanford IDIQ implementation Lessons Learned

21. Summary • PDWG mission is aligned with our DOE Customer • AWP scope is important to the customer, contractors, and our industry • Customer and contractor leadership fully supportive • 2019 AWP is on track • 2020 planning is underway