Реферат: Environmental Cleanup On Air Force Installations Essay

To determine the success of the Florida ADR program an evaluation of each tier as well as the entire program was completed. A summary of the program evaluations is

presented below.

Tier I

Initially the Tier I Team did an excellent job of developing and implementing the ADR structure for use by the Tier II and III Teams. In addition, the team set up

mandatory training and team building requirements which would expedite each teams group dynamics of “storming, norming and performing.” Upon completion of this

phase for the AF the Tier I team expanded its focus to include other defense agencies. With the expanded focus the team grew from approximately 15-20 participants to

approximately 40 “decision makers”. This group included multiple representatives from each agency. The group also failed to follow the principal rule of consensus

decision making of “Preparation, Preparation, Preparation”. The size of the team and the lack of preparation and commitment on the issues of funding, communication,

organization representation, and scope have made the Tier I team unproductive over the last 9-12 months. The team has been meeting 6-8 times per year.

Tier II

The Tier II Team was implemented as management position with the primary purpose of supporting Tier III. The group has a membership of 25 representatives

predominantly from the AF. With limited direction from Tier I the Tier II Team developed several goals which include:

- Management support of Tier III teams

- Documenting successes/failures of the program

- Cross-feed of information

- development of statewide cleanup standards

The Tier II Team has supported Tier III teams, but has had limited success in cross feed of information and developing cleanup standards. The success stories published

by the Tier II team indicate the use of ADR is cost effective. The ADR program in Florida, procured by the AF, has an average annual cost of $250,000.00. The success

stories identify cost saving and cost avoidance in excess of $1,000,000.00.

The Tier II team has set up links between the Tier II and each Tier III team to provide management support and exchange of information. The Tier II team has

successfully initiated an informal cross-feed of information through the publishing of success stories and using Tier II links, but an ongoing method for a continuous

information/data exchange has not been developed. The team has not been able to answer any statewide issues concerning clean-up standards, land use, or investigation

standards. The team has been meeting a minimum of 8 times per year.

Tier III

The Tier III teams have demonstrated the greatest success stemming from the ADR process. The representatives from each agency have been empowered by their

organizations to make decisions within the regulatory requirements. The teams have shown creativity in dealing with investigation requirements, review times, clean-up

methodology, and final clean-up requirements. The team building exercises and facilitation have enabled each team to high performing groups in a very short time period.

The teams have used consensus ADR to make field decisions to support dynamic cleanup actions and investigations. The teams have been meeting 12 times a year, at a

minimum of once a month.