1.0 Program Name:
Biological and Environmental Research
2.0 Position Title of the Program Manager:
Associate Director of the Office of Science for Biological and Environmental Research
SC-70/Germantown Building
U.S. Department of Energy
1000 Independence Ave., S.W.
Washington, D.C. 20585-1290
http://www.sc.doe.gov/ober/ober_top.html
3.0 DOE Strategic Plan General Goal:
General Goal 5, World Class Scientific Research Capacity: Provide world-class scientific research capacity needed to: ensure the success of Department missions in national and energy security; advance the frontiers of knowledge in physical sciences and areas of biological, medical, environmental, and computational sciences, or provide world-class research facilities for the Nation’s science enterprise.
4.0 Mission Statement and Program Goal:
In the next decade, science will reveal the mechanisms and fundamental secrets of biological and environmental systems. We will be able to manipulate matter at the micro, nano, and molecular scales; and we will be able to model and predict biological and environmental interactions on a regional and global basis. Such capabilities will provide us unprecedented opportunities to forge new pathways to energy productions, environmental management, and medical diagnosis and treatment.
Mission: The mission of the Biological and Environmental Research (BER) program is to advance environmental and biomedical knowledge that promotes national security through improved energy production, development, and use; international scientific leadership that underpins our Nation’s technological advances; knowledge needed to support the President’s National Energy Plan; and research that improves the quality of life for all Americans. BER supports these vital national missions through competitive and peer-reviewed research at national laboratories, universities, and private institutions.
Program Goal 05.21.00.00: Provide the biological and environmental discoveries necessary to clean and protect our environment, offer new energy alternatives, and fundamentally change the nature of medical care to improve human health.
5.0 Objectives and Performance Targets:
At the core of this science program, and underpinning all of our objectives, is a fundamental quest for knowledge. Our program history provides a compelling story of how this knowledge has already shaped the world around us, and the future appears even more promising as we focus on such questions as:
What are the fundamental genetic processes, structures, and mechanisms that living systems use to control their responses to their environment, and how can we predict and repeat those processes to put Nature to work for us?
How do we design new and revolutionary technologies and processes, using and combining principles of biological and physical systems that offer new solutions for challenges from medicine to environmental cleanup?
How do clouds influence climate change, and how does human activity affect the behavior of clouds? How sensitive is climate to different levels of greenhouse gases and aerosols in the environment?
Below are the main objectives for Biological and Environmental Research. Complementing this stand-alone Program Plan, and providing additional details of our program objectives are the Office of Science Strategic Plan (February 2004), the Facilities for the Future of Science: A Twenty Year Outlook (November 2003), as well as the most recent Office of Science budget.
Objectives:
- Life Sciences: Tap the power of genomics and microbial systems for solutions to our Nation’s energy and environmental challenges.
- Climate Change Research: Unravel the mysteries of Earth’s changing climate and protect our living planet.
- Environmental Remediation: Understand the complex physical, chemical, and biological properties of contaminated sites for new solutions to environmental remediation.
- Medical Sciences: Master the convergence of the physical and the life sciences to deliver revolutionary technologies for health and medical applications.
An accompanying timeline (Road Maps) provides a roadmap for these objectives, including our planned future facilities, performance targets, and the primary connections and program interdependencies. Two important caveats, described below, must be observed when viewing the timeline.
The Objectives, Performance Targets and schedules identified on the timeline are for planning purposes only and do not constitute financial or contractual commitments by the Federal government. More often than not, there are significant discrepancies between planning levels and subsequent, enacted budgets. It is reasonable to anticipate that resources may not be available to fully support every performance target, including but not limited to the schedule for performance. Subsequent annual updates of this plan will reflect and adjust for those fiscal constraints based on the latest available information.
Additionally, there are many more connections (lines) and interdependencies (footnotes in red) than are displayed on the actual timelines. The very nature of science is multi-disciplinary and interdependent. Consequently, those relationships that are depicted are only illustrative, although they are believed to largely representative of the primary relationships.
6.0 Program Evaluation:
The BER program conducts frequent and comprehensive evaluations of every component of the program. Progress against established plans is evaluated by periodic internal and external performance reviews. These reviews provide an opportunity to verify and validate performance. Quarterly, semiannual, and annual reviews consistent with specific program management plans are held to ensure technical progress, cost and schedule adherence, and responsiveness to program requirements.
All on-going research activities undergo regular (every three to five years) peer review and merit evaluation based on procedures set down in 10 CFR 605 for the extramural grant program, and under a similar process for the laboratory research programs and scientific user facilities. Results of these evaluations are used to modify the activities as appropriate. Additionally, all new research activities are also selected through peer review and merit evaluation.
BER actively seeks external input using a variety of advisory bodies. The Biological and Environmental Research Advisory Committee (BERAC) was established by DOE to provide independent advice on complex scientific and technical issues related to the BER program. At the highest level, regular reviews of individual BER program elements and of the entire BER research program are conducted by BERAC. BER goes one step further in conducting program reviews. Panels of distinguished scientists are regularly charged with evaluating the quality of individual programs and with exploring ways of entraining new ideas and research performers from different scientific fields. BER also regularly compares its programs to the scientific priorities recommended by the BERAC and by the standing committees created by the Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP).
A Committee of Visitors has been appointed under the guidance of BERAC to review the management practices of the BER program. In particular they will examined the decision process for awarding grants and for determining priorities of funding among the various activities within the BER program.
Change control and off-ramps:
Science changes rapidly and breakthroughs in knowledge by our science programs, other agencies, industry and the international science community create a constant state of flux. Although there are long-term research themes and lengthy horizons for new cutting-edge tools, basic research must be constantly revisited in a context of new discoveries and the most promising current opportunities.
Additionally, basic research is, by its nature, unpredictable. Results that appear to mark a failed experiment are often as significant to progress in the field as a “successful” result. This is the reason that expert review will be used to assess progress toward our objectives. It is critical that all evaluations take this unique aspect of research into account so that success will be judged as advancing the field rather than meeting the specifics of an objective or target.
Underpinning the Office of Science change control process and our off-ramps are a strong dependence on our program advisory committees, for us the BERAC. Our program and our advisory committee are driven by the following three major criteria for evaluating change and possible off-ramps: Quality, Relevance, and Performance. These criteria are also the criteria that the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) applies to basic research.
As part of the Office of Science Strategic Planning process, our advisory committee is consulted on the actual Objectives for the program. A broader array of stakeholders from government, industry, and academia are also consulted. Such input helps form the basis for a new focus or direction at this more aggregate level, and the current objectives for this program were the result of a recently completed cycle and preparation of a new Office of Science Strategic Plan. The objectives from the Strategic Plan form the basis for this Program Plan.
Key Targets were also developed in consultation with BERAC as part of OMB’s Program Assessment Rating Tool (PART) process. Progress reviews for these key targets will be conducted by BERAC every three years. These reviews will allow us to assess progress so that the program can continue, redirect or discontinue the efforts that support those targets.
Ultimately, all decisions on focus, emphasis, resources, and possible shifts are vetted at the appropriate levels within our program - from the researchers to the program managers, and often to the level of the Associate Director. Depending on the scope of the issue and the venue, the Director of the Office of Science may be involved. For major off-ramps, the Director of the Office of Science is always involved and assumes final responsibility.
7.0 Key External Factors:
The BER program is closely coordinated with the activities of other federal agencies (e.g., National Institutes of Health, National Science Foundation (NSF), National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), Department of Commerce/National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Environmental Protection Administration (EPA), Department of Agriculture, and Department of Defense). BER Climate Change Research is coordinated with the U.S. Global Change Research Program, an interagency program codified by Public Law 101-606 and involving thirteen federal agencies. BER also promotes the transfer of the results of its basic research to contribute to DOE missions in areas of future energy sources, improved use of fossil fuels (carbon sequestration), and reduced environmental impacts of energy production and use.
The BER program has many connections with other organizations, and is dependent on their planning needs, identified challenges, information, scientific data sharing, and more. Some of the key external factors for the BER program, include: the SC-wide SciDAC effort and broader BER dependencies on the ASCR program for computation and simulation; the artificial retina effort relies on industry and BES (linkages for materials research); climate modeling involves intense coordination and cooperation with agencies involved in the Climate Change Science Plan and climate research is also closely linked to data and efforts of the international science community; the environmental remediation program is strongly influenced by needs of the EM program, including new technologies for in situ characterization; genomics efforts support bioenergy sciences with the BES program, and the Carbon Sequestration Roadmap and associated research is a joint effort with DOE’s Fossil Energy program.
External factors that affect the programs and performance include: (1) mission needs as described by the DOE and SC mission statements and strategic plans; (2) evolving scientific opportunities, which sometimes emerge in a way that revolutionizes disciplines; (3) results of external program reviews and international benchmarking activities of entire fields or subfields, such as those performed by the National Academy of Sciences; (4) unanticipated failures, for example, in the evaluation of new computer architectures for science, that cannot be mitigated in a timely manner; (5) strategic and programmatic decisions made by other (non-DOE) Federal agencies and by international entities; and (6) the evolution of the commercial market for high performance computing and networking hardware and software.