0

Full Content is available to subscribers

Subscribe/Learn More  >

Delivering Value for Money: Trust and Verify?

[+] Author Affiliations
Alastair Laird

Project Time & Cost, Inc., Atlanta, GA

Paper No. ICEM2011-59253, pp. 379-387; 9 pages
doi:10.1115/ICEM2011-59253
From:
  • ASME 2011 14th International Conference on Environmental Remediation and Radioactive Waste Management
  • ASME 2011 14th International Conference on Environmental Remediation and Radioactive Waste Management, Parts A and B
  • Reims, France, September 25–29, 2011
  • Conference Sponsors: Nuclear Engineering Division and Environmental Engineering Division
  • ISBN: 978-0-7918-5498-3
  • Copyright © 2011 by ASME

abstract

Accurate estimates for national Environmental Management remediation work programs are an essential ingredient of ensuring that plans can be adequately funded. They also form the basis of value measurement as the work is executed on an annual or program basis. However, the inherent uncertainties of many of the Environmental Management (EM) and decommissioning tasks, both in terms of the technical challenges faced, options available, end states to be achieved; and the general risks and uncertainties associated with the hazard and its characterisation means that many estimates were always going to have very high levels of uncertainty. In 2002 the United Kingdom Nuclear Liabilities Estimate was quoted as £48Bn when the government restructured the UK civil nuclear industry and set out the basis for forming what was to become the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority (NDA). By 2005 the NDA had assessed the costs as £56Bn but by 2008 the costs had significantly increased to £73Bn and continue to rise. How does this relate to the more immediate challenges of ‘working off’ the plan and demonstrating Value for Money can be achieved in the near term? In parallel the US Department of Energy Environmental Management Office introduced its ‘Best in Class’ initiative in 2007 — the intention being to tackle underperformance and drive improvements in the baselines and the contractor delivery programs. This paper compares and contrasts UK and US EM program performance issues and covers several interdependent topic areas including: a) Government funding impacts, b) Contractor program estimates, c) Program Controls requirements, and d) Independent assurance requirements. This paper attempts to answer the question “how can governments demonstrate Value for Money in EM”.

Copyright © 2011 by ASME

Figures

Tables

Interactive Graphics

Video

Country-Specific Mortality and Growth Failure in Infancy and Yound Children and Association With Material Stature

Use interactive graphics and maps to view and sort country-specific infant and early dhildhood mortality and growth failure data and their association with maternal

NOTE:
Citing articles are presented as examples only. In non-demo SCM6 implementation, integration with CrossRef’s "Cited By" API will populate this tab (http://www.crossref.org/citedby.html).

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In