The Facilities and Operations Infrastructure Planning Program Management function includes management of the GPP, GPE, and Infrastructure Line Item Capital Programs, as well as overhead-funded low-value equipment and ES&H projects.
As part of Infrastructure Management, ORNL is committed to good stewardship of its resources, both in management of existing facilities and in planning for future needs. As described in the ORNL Land and Facilities Plan (ORNL/M-6714, August 1999), UT-Battelle has the management and planning responsibility for ORNL's facilities and for most of the undeveloped land area of the 34,513-acre Oak Ridge Reservation.
The Infrastructure Planning Management Office in the Operations, Environment, Safety, and Health Directorate carries out
Programs at ORNL require a variety of buildings and equipment, including specialized experimental laboratories, a large complement of office space, and major utility and waste disposal facilities. ORNL has one of the oldest physical plants in the DOE laboratory system, and continuing efforts will be required to renovate and rehabilitate general-purpose buildings and utility systems that have deteriorated because of insufficient capital improvement funding for modernization and adaptation to changing program needs.
Although funding constraints will continue to limit the amount of work that can be done to remedy this situation, the implementation of recommendations made by the Engineering Design and Construction Reengineering Team is reducing the cost of construction and upgrades. The Risk Ranking Board will facilitate a consistent, integrated ranking of Laboratory requirements, as will the planned expansion of a business risk methodology to assess requirements for site-wide utility systems. The development of this integrated process will support the most effective allocation of scarce resources.
Budget. FOIP is funded through the Laboratory Space Charge system. Currently FOIP has a budget of $739K for primary operations with an additional $260K for space moves. This budget funds 7 exempt, and 1 nonexempt employees.
Site and Reservation Planning. Planning documentation for the ORNL site and reservation provides real-time reporting of plans and accomplishments. Issues of revision and current accuracy associated with the planning documentation process are met by Web-based publication of documents to ensure that changes to planning documents are made available to ORNL managers and staff for planning of activities. FIMS information is utilized by DOE HQ programs for various purposes. Recent experience responding to DOE HQ requests, such as Environmental Liabilities Estimates, have pointed out inconsistencies in FIMS data with actual site and facility conditions. Data inaccuracies in FIMS need to be resolved.
Space Management. Design and facilities planning is always an ongoing activity because of changes in programmatic funding of projects and relocation of personnel associated with changing missions. The majority of activity for design and facilities planning is associated redesign of existing space.
Surplus/Excess Facilities S&M and Transfer Costs. ORNL S&M costs, in general, are currently funded through Laboratory or divisional overhead. These costs will exceed $1,000,000 in FY 2000. Additionally, deactivation costs for Buildings 5207, 5211, and 9220 at the Y-12 Plant are estimated to exceed $1,500,000 in FY 2000. To comply with the requirements of DOE O 430.1A, "Life Cycle Asset Management " (LCAM) for transfer of surplus/excess contaminated facilities to EM in FY 2002, funds in excess of $3,200,000 will be required. LCAM also notes that the landlord program for a site should fund these costs. Annual requests for funding for these activities are submitted to Basic Energy Sciences by means of a field work proposal (FWP). To date, no funding has been received for these activities.
These costs will continue to grow and will become an increasingly significant burden on overhead if landlord funding is not provided. Additionally, provisions in LCAM for transfer of S&M funding to EM with the transferred facilities is not feasible for Laboratory overhead.
At ORNL, 104 facilities have been transferred to either the EM-40 or EM-60 program. The EM-40 and EM-60 programs are not expected to accept any additional facilities until FY 2002. Twenty of ORNL's surplus facilities are contaminated and would appear to meet criteria for transfer to the EM program. Noncontaminated facilities are not eligible for transfer to the EM program. The burden for disposition of ORNL's 32 surplus and inactive facilities that are noncontaminated will fall on Laboratory overhead and/or currently funded programs. This will have a negative impact, both short-term and long-term, on R&D and/or landlord programs.
When a division or function ceases an effort in a building, the equipment associated with that function can remain in place for potential but uncommitted use. This results in inefficient use of valuable real estate at ORNL. Sponsor funding over time can become nonexistent and the upkeep, maintenance, space ownership, and associated problems can become a burden on the Laboratory.
Infrastructure Management. Issues involving Infrastructure Management are complex and entwined with ES&H legacy problems and funding levels. ORNL is the oldest physical plant among Multiprogram Energy Laboratories Facilities Support (MELFS) Laboratories. About one-third of ORNL's total existing buildings are more than 40 years old, and DOE capital expenditures to upgrade and replace ORNL facilities have been only a small fraction of those in normal industrial practice. Thus, ORNL has accumulated a substantial legacy of ES&H problems for correction. The existing buildings, utilities, and equipment require substantial maintenance cost to ensure reliability to continue R&D efforts in an environmentally and worker-safe condition. The ESHQ&I process has been initiated at ORNL to provide a means of reporting infrastructure planning and budgeting information in an integrated, efficient, timely, and consistent manner that will support ORNL and DOE budgetary needs and requests. Many infrastructure activities may have an impact on the environment and on the safety and health of site workers and the public. Similarly, ES&H requirements and needs drive many infrastructure activities. Current backlogs in capital funding categories that support infrastructure are as follows:
|General Plant Projects (GPP)||$58,000K|
|General Purpose Equipment (GPE)||$33,000K|
|Landlord Line Items (LI)||$95,400K|
Additional requirements are added to these backlogs each year as new projects are identified. ORNL's current annual funding levels for these funding categories are $7,750K for GPP and GPE projects and $4,000K to $6,000K for Landlord Line Items.
At this level of funding, only the most urgent needs of the Laboratory can be addressed and backlogs can be expected to increase. The ORNL GPP/GPE budget would need to be increased to between $12,000K to $14,000K annually to adequately address legacy issues. Additionally, the MELFS Landlord Line Item Program, managed by SC-82, currently receives only $20,000K annually for the MELFS Laboratories. This level of funding is inadequate to meet the needs of each Laboratory and should be increased. A key objective of the ORNL Landlord Program is to achieve timely and efficient utilization of available capital funding. A general guideline is that 50% of available capital funding should be costed in any particular fiscal year. ORNL's objective is to cost at least 65% of available capital funding.
Overall, 66.8% of available capital funding was costed in FY 1999 as follows:
|Program  ||Funding ($K)||Cost ($K)||% Costed|
One area for improvement is GPP costing. Factors that impacted GPP costing included the cancellation of the proposed Computer Facility project in January 1999 and the receipt of an additional $250K of GPP funding in September 1999. The computer facility was budgeted for $2,400K of ORNL's $4,450K GPP funding. The cancellation of this project in January required the reallocation of the funding to contingency GPP projects, with resultant delays in costing for the newly authorized projects. Receipt of the additional $250K in September 1999 did not provide time to cost any of these funds. Without the additional $250K, the GPP costs in FY 1999 would have been 50.6%.
About Us |
Project and Equipment |
Plans and Reports |
FOIP Home | ORNL Public | Disclaimer | Contact Us