As part of its efforts to put its house in order, the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board (DNFSB) intends hire a high-level staff management position, Chairman Bruce Hamilton said during a recent meeting in Washington, D.C.
“We need to hire this executive secretary, or chief of staff, or whatever you want to call it,” Hamilton said at the Feb. 14 meeting. “Which we are doing, by the way.” He briefly alluded to a notice being filed with the Office of Personnel Management, which manages the federal government’s civilian workforce.
The addition of the executive staffer to improve operations, and a more robust approach to strategic planning, were among needs cited in a highly critical report on the DNFSB in November from the National Academy of Public Administration (NAPA). The report found the quality of the DNFSB’s interaction with the Energy Department had fallen to an all-time low and that the board must take ownership of problems and set a positive tone for staff.
The academy did the study at the board’s request. The report said the DNFSB needs more deliberation and teamwork, and also must increase its engagement with key groups, including the Energy Department and Congress. The academy added that the board needs to streamline procedures, improve internal communication, and review its agency field staffing needs.
The DNFSB is a safety watchdog for the Department of Energy’s nuclear complex, both active weapons facilities and sites undergoing environmental remediation. While it has no enforcement power over DOE it can issue recommendations to which the energy secretary must respond publicly.
Its oversight mission includes starts with design and construction of DOE nuclear facilities and extends through operations and decommissioning. “Given the critical nature of what the Board oversees, its mission can be described as compelling, intricate, strategic, complicated, and daunting,” NAPA said.
This is especially true for a small organization with less than 100 employees, a budget of $31 million, and only four of five presidentially appointed board members in 2018, the report said. Then-Chairman Sean Sullivan stepped down in February 2018 after it came to light that he had urged the White House to eliminate the agency.
Due to the safety and economic implications of a nuclear accident – such as the February 2014 underground radiation release that idled the DOE’s Waste Isolation Pilot Plant in New Mexico for about three years – board members must work together efficiently, according to the academy report.
The agency is in early discussions regarding adding an executive director of operations, DNFSB General Manager Glenn Sklar said by email. While it was frequently mentioned during the meeting, the DNFSB has not formally authorized or advertised the position yet, he added. No time frame has been established for filling the post.
The DNFSB is moving ahead with the addition of a supervisory special assistant for external affairs who will take over legislative affairs and media liaison duties, Sklar said. That position will be advertised “imminently,” he added.
Hamilton and other board members noted the role and expectations for the executive post have yet to be drafted. The much larger Nuclear Regulatory Commission has an executive director for operations, who is effectively the agency’s chief operations officer and manages its day-to-day activities.
Board members Joyce Connery, Jessie Hill Roberson, and Daniel Santos said the DNFSB has plenty of problems to work on before the new hire starts.
Connery suggested poor communication is a major problem, both between the board and DNFSB staff and between the board members themselves. For example, board members could talk collaboratively about their view of cases before them – reducing the need for staff to decipher the different opinions.
“I don’t think hiring the perfect person is going to solve the problem,” Connery said. “No hiring that we do is going to resolve … our unwillingness to talk to each other.”
The board devoted its business meeting to slogging through recommendations in the NAPA report, as well as a November report from the NRC inspector general on the issues tracking system used by DNFSB staff. The DNFSB does not have its own inspector general, so the NRC handles those responsibilities.
The DNFSB has an opportunity to reboot its communications with congressional oversight committees over the next six weeks or so as the federal government works on its proposed fiscal 2020 budget, Hamilton said. He admitted the board’s congressional outreach has suffered in the past couple of years.
There are a number of new congressional staffers, and some new members of Congress, who don’t know what the DNFSB is, board members said.
