ECA Update: January 18, 2013
Published: Fri, 01/18/13
Stakeholders React to DOE's Used Fuel Management and Disposal Strategy
Nuclear Energy Institute January 11, 2013 WASHINGTON, Jan. 11, 2013 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- The Nuclear Energy Institute, the National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners and the Nuclear Waste Strategy Coalition welcome the release of the U.S. Department of Energy's strategy to address the Blue Ribbon Commission on America's Nuclear Future recommendations presented to the Secretary last January.
The DOE's report recognizes the need to establish a sustainable, integrated program to safely and efficiently manage used nuclear fuel from nuclear energy facilities and high-level radioactive waste from our nation's defense program. On behalf of nuclear energy producers and suppliers, state public utility commissions, and other public and private sector organizations, the three groups advocate meaningful reform of policy that guides America's nuclear fuel management program and look forward to fully analyzing DOE's proposed strategy. NEI, NARUC, NWSC and others stand ready to work with Congress and the administration on legislative proposals that contribute to the development of a sustainable used fuel management program for this country.
The Energy Department endorsed several used nuclear fuel management initiatives outlined by the Blue Ribbon Commission on America's Nuclear Future. Many of these concepts have long been supported by our members and other experts. We believe that Congress and the administration should place high priority on the following:
If implemented, these elements would create a solid foundation on which to build a sustainable used fuel management program while development of a permanent repository is pursued.
After two years of BRC deliberations and an additional year for DOE to develop its strategy, it is essential that the nuclear waste fee be used solely for its intended purpose--to cover the cost of used fuel management and disposal. The fee (one-tenth of a cent per kilowatt-hour of electricity) paid by consumers of electricity from nuclear power plants, which totals about $750 million each year, is effectively unavailable for its intended purpose.
We believe actions can be taken to encourage and achieve consolidated storage in a willing host community within the next 10 years, well before a repository could be opened. This facility would permit the federal government to begin meeting its contractual and statutory obligations under the Nuclear Waste Policy Act to remove used reactor fuel from decommissioned and operating nuclear power plants while reducing the taxpayer liabilities associated with the government's delay in accepting used fuel. The DOE was required by the 1982 law to accept used nuclear fuel beginning in 1998.
In addition to a consolidated storage program, a geologic repository program is necessary and should be pursued simultaneously. We continue to support the completion of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission's review of DOE's license application for the proposed Yucca Mountain, Nev., repository so that the science can dictate whether it is a suitable site. We believe that a consolidated storage program that focuses initially on decommissioned fuel must be pursued in conjunction with any repository program including Yucca Mountain.
Creating a new management organization is a priority. It will provide consistent leadership for a focused mission of managing used nuclear fuel while better insulating the program from political interference or a constant rotation of managers. In addition to safeguarding consumer payments, fixing the funding issues will help ensure that the new organization will have a sustainable revenue stream to fulfill its mission.
These proposals by the administration are a positive step toward creating a sustainable used fuel management program for both commercial used nuclear fuel and defense radioactive waste. The administration must work with Congress on near-term actions, such as a pilot storage project for used fuel from decommissioned reactors, ending the misuse of the Nuclear Waste Fund and providing sufficient resources within DOE in the fiscal 2014 budget and thereafter to manage the waste program until a new organization is created.
The National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners is the national association representing the State Public Service Commissioners who regulate essential utility services, including energy, telecommunications, and water. NARUC members are responsible for assuring reliable utility service at fair, just, and reasonable rates.
The Nuclear Energy Institute is the policy organization for the nuclear technologies industry. NEI's members include all utilities licensed to operate commercial nuclear power plants in the United States, nuclear plant designers, major architect/engineering firms, fuel fabrication facilities, nuclear material licensees, and other organizations and individuals involved in the nuclear energy industry. For more information on integrated used nuclear fuel management visit our website.
The Nuclear Waste Strategy Coalition is an ad hoc organization representing the collective interests of state utility regulators, consumer advocates, tribal governments, local governments, electric utilities, and associate members, on nuclear waste policy matters. NWSC's primary focus is to protect ratepayer payments into the Nuclear Waste Fund and to support the removal and ultimate disposal of spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive waste currently stranded at numerous commercial, defense, research, and decommissioned sites in 39 states.
Fiscal 2014 budget delayed, OMB confirms, citing uncertainty Charles S. Clark, Government Executive January 15, 2013 Acting White House budget director Jeffrey Zients has confirmed that the Obama administration's fiscal 2014 budget will be not be ready by the normal release date in early February.
In a newly released Jan. 11 letter responding to an inquiry from House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan, R-Wis., Zients said the "considerable uncertainty" created by the "protracted fiscal cliff negotiations" means "the administration was forced to delay its fiscal 2014 budget preparations, which in turn will delay the budget's submission to Congress."
The American Taxpayer Relief Act signed into law on Jan. 2, Zients stressed, "resolved a significant portion of that uncertainty" with its package of tax rate hikes and other adjustments, including the postponement of the deadline for sequestration from Jan. 2 to March 1.
"For over a year and half, the administration has been working with Congress to forge an agreement on a plan that will both grow our economy and significantly reduce the deficit," Zients wrote, reiterating the administration's call for a "balanced approach." He set no date for the coming submission, but said, "The administration is working diligently on its budget request."
The news comes after agencies had already reported that they were behind schedule in receiving "passback" guidance from OMB on their original budget requests.
After the delay was announced, Ryan gently mocked Obama on Twitter, tweating, "A small step toward fiscal sanity? Propose a budget and do so on time."
He also republished a year-old statement in which he criticized Obama for being late with his budget more than any president since passage of the 1921 Budget and Accounting Act. "The decision to delay the release of his budget again could not come at a more precarious moment for our fiscal and economic future," Ryan said then. "Rather than tackle these challenges head-on, this president continues to punt, while his party's leaders in the Senate have simply abandoned responsible budgeting altogether."
Patrick Lester, director of fiscal Policy at the Center for Effective Government (formerly OMB Watch), sees a possible calculation by the administration. "Besides the underlying scheduling issues, there's an issue of timing," he said. "Whatever is included in the president's budget will be incorporated in the final deal, so it's a form of negotiating with one's self."
OMB tells agencies to 'intensify' sequestration planning Jack Moore, Federal News Radio January 14, 2013 Agencies across government should "intensify" their planning for across-the-board sequestration cuts, according to a Jan. 14 memo to the heads of executive department and agencies from Jeff Zients, the acting director of the Office of Management and Budget.
The memo -- which reiterates that agencies should not yet take steps to implement any budget reductions -- directs agencies to continue planning for budgetary uncertainty. That uncertainty stems in large part from from sequestration, which is slated to lop some $85 billion from the budget at the beginning of March unless Congress intervenes.
"Should Congress fail to act to avoid sequestration, there will be significant and harmful impacts on a wide variety of government services and operations," Zients wrote in the memo, citing deep Defense Department cuts and the possible need to furlough hundreds of thousands of federal employees.
The memo directs agencies to:
If any agencies must take action in the near-term to reduce spending or operations, they should work closely with their respective OMB Resource Management Office (RMO) first, Zients said.
Adding to the gloomy budget outlook is the expiration of a short-term funding measure March 27 that could presage a government shutdown.
Zients: 2014 budget process delayed
Already, the administration is behind schedule in releasing its budget request for the next fiscal year. In a Jan. 11 letter to House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan (R-Wis.), Zients provided no specifics on the release of the fiscal 2014 budget, typically released in early February. Delays in the budget process were caused by the "protracted 'fiscal cliff' negotiations" that ended earlier this month, Zients said.
Zients' memo comes on the heels of similar guidance issued last week by the Defense Department, which directed components to plan for civilian furloughs and other cutbacks in the event of sequestration, a lapse in congressional appropriations -- or both.
Meanwhile, in a Jan. 13 message to Navy and Marine Corps personnel, Navy Secretary Ray Mabus called for immediate "belt-tightening measures" to sustain operations if Congress punts on passing a full budget and instead only extends the continuing resolution.
"Because sequestration was delayed, our focus must now shift to the impacts of the CR, which creates significant shortfalls in Operation & Maintenance, Navy (OMN) and Marine Corps (OMMC) accounts and the resultant steps we must take to maintain a minimum level of presence," Mabus wrote in the message.
Sen. Murkowski Announces Energy Committee Personnel Changes Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee January 14, 2013 WASHINGTON, D.C. - U.S. Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, today announced personnel changes on her Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee staff.
McKie Campbell will be departing as the committee's staff director on Jan. 25. Karen Billups, currently the committee's chief counsel, will be promoted to staff director. Pat McCormick, currently committee special counsel, will be promoted to chief counsel.
Campbell joined Murkowski's energy staff as committee staff director in 2008. "I've been blessed in my life to have a number of good jobs, but this has been the best. The decision to leave a great boss and a great staff was extraordinarily difficult, and I wouldn't do it if I didn't know that with Karen and Pat they will be in great hands. I will be forever in Senator Murkowski's debt for giving me this opportunity," Campbell said.
Billups has been with the committee since 2003, and has been chief counsel since 2008. She also worked for the committee from 1995-2000, serving as counsel, and later senior counsel, on energy issues and civilian and defense nuclear issues. "I'm honored with the trust the senator is placing in me. I believe it is a vote of confidence in all of the staff continuing the path McKie has set," Billups said.
McCormick joined the committee in April 2011. He has been providing counsel on all matters within the committee's jurisdiction and will be the senior staff member on electricity issues. Prior to joining the committee, McCormick was a partner at Hunton & Williams LLP, where he led the firm's regulated markets and energy infrastructure practice.
"McKie leaves big shoes to fill," Murkowski said, "but we've built a great team at the committee and I have the utmost confidence in Karen to lead the committee in the new Congress. She has unparalleled knowledge of committee history and issues, has worked extensively on thousands of lands bills and negotiated numerous energy issues. She is respected throughout Congress and has a firm grasp of Alaskan's concerns and priorities. I wish McKie the best of luck in continuing his career dedicated to bettering our nation's energy and natural resources policies."
Why the former Washington governor is likely to join Obama's Cabinet
Coral Davenport and Caren Bohan, National Journal January 17, 2013 President Obama hinted at his news conference this week that he would soon name some high-profile women to top jobs in his administration. Christine Gregoire, the former governor of Washington state, will almost certainly be one of them.
Gregoire, who has made energy issues a cornerstone of her gubernatorial tenure, is likely headed for one of three Cabinet-level jobs that are vacant now or will soon become vacant: Energy secretary, Interior secretary, or head of the Environmental Protection Agency. As a former head of Washington state's Department of Ecology, Gregoire is steeped in experience in energy and environmental issues. Her enthusiastic support for renewable energy has won plaudits from environmentalists, but she's also known for her ability to speak effectively about the realities of the fossil-fuel economy.
After Obama nominated John Kerry as secretary of State, Chuck Hagel as Defense secretary, and Jacob Lew as Treasury secretary, he was hit with a barrage of criticism about the lack of diversity in his selections for plum jobs. In a column in The Washington Post, Ruth Marcus suggested that Obama ask to borrow Mitt Romney's "binders full of women" to balance out a Cabinet that includes so many white men.
Gregoire would check that box but would also fill other crucial needs. Obama lacks an effective spokesperson within his administration for energy and environmental issues. Gregoire would fit that bill, bringing a comfort level on the national stage and an ability to tailor her message to a broad audience.
Energy Secretary Steven Chu has often quipped that he is a scientist and not a politician. He's right. The Nobel Prize-winning physicist, who never relished the limelight, is expected to move on from his job early this year, though his departure has not yet been announced. EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson, who has already announced she is leaving, was considered a political lightning rod, limiting her ability to serve as a national spokesperson for Obama's environmental agenda. Interior Secretary Ken Salazar, a former U.S. senator from Colorado who is leaving his post in March, does have an ease on the public stage, but he provoked controversy in 2010 with his vow to keep the administration's "boot on the neck" of British Petroleum in the aftermath of the catastrophic oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico. More recently, Salazar was forced to apologize for another verbal gaffe when he was heard on tape threatening to punch out a reporter.
If Obama chooses Gregoire for Interior, it would be in keeping with a tradition of naming Western governors or politicians to the job, though she has an equal shot at the Energy or EPA positions. People close to the administration say she has been on the White House's radar for one of the senior energy and environment slots since before the election.
The timing could work out well for Gregoire, too. She finished her tenure as governor this week and there is buzz that she is interested in heading to the nation's capital.
Ashton Carter is staying at Pentagon Ben Geman and Jeremy Herb, The Hill January 11, 2013 Deputy Defense Secretary Ashton Carter is staying at the Pentagon, ending speculation that he will soon be tapped for Secretary of Energy.
With current Energy Secretary Steven Chu widely expected to step down soon, Carter's name was circulating as a potential successor at DOE, an agency that plays a major security role by overseeing the nation's nuclear weapons stockpile and nuclear labs.
But a senior administration official said President Obama has asked Carter to stay at the Defense Department.
Carter is looking forward to working with former Sen. Chuck Hagel (R-Neb.), Obama's nominee to replace current Defense Secretary Leon Panetta, the official said.
Next Fiscal Fight Shifts Focus to Spending Cuts Charlie Cook, National Journal January 14, 2013 Nearly everyone views the year-end fiscal-cliff fight as a debacle, but once that is accepted as a given, opinions tend to diverge. While one can say that the vast majority of Bush-era tax cuts were not just extended but made permanent--something that Republicans and conservatives should like--there were effectively no spending cuts, and in no meaningful way were entitlements trimmed or reformed.
People on either side could view the cup as either half-full or half-empty. But as a practical matter, the only area where the Left caved was to pick whom not to raise taxes on, giving in by allowing the definition of "middle class" to rise to $400,000 in annual income ($450,000 for a family), with the higher rates kicking in for income above that level. If only a family earning almost half-a-million dollars a year really were middle class. Other key provisions set the estate-tax rate at 40 percent (it was scheduled to rise from 35 to 55 percent), with an exemption on the first $5 million; created solutions for the alternative minimum tax and the "doc fix"; and increased the capital-gains rate from 15 to 20 percent.
But the next fight will come during that triple-witching period when Congress faces another sequestration battle, negotiations over raising the debt ceiling, and the possibility of a government shutdown if an agreement on funding for the balance of the fiscal year isn't dealt with in time. It's much more likely that Democrats will face more of a winter of discontent than Republicans. With tax rates now increased for all of those Democrats were willing to raise them on, the battleground will shift mostly to spending cuts and entitlement reform. Republican leaders' claims that they won't go along with anymore tax increases sound like wishful thinking; there will be more revenue found whether they like it or not. For the most part, though, it will be Democrats' turn to have fiscal root-canal work done--without the benefit of anesthesia.
While the focus, until now, has been on the struggle between Republican leaders and their even more conservative base and caucus members, it will be up to President Obama and Democratic congressional leaders to deal with their party's more exotic members. No one expected a fiscal-cliff deal effectively free of spending cuts--score one for Democrats--but that now has to change. The Democrats, who won the presidential race, expanded their Senate majority, and picked up seats in the House, will have a hard time dealing with the fact that they now have to endure pain.
The fact is that both parties are experiencing selective perception. There's a great chart, developed last year by the White House Office of Management and Budget, that's floating around town and sitting in a lot of PowerPoint decks. Covering the period from 1960 to 2011, it features two solid lines, one red and one blue, mapped against two horizontal dotted lines. The solid red line tracks spending as a percentage of gross domestic product for each year, and its corresponding dotted red line marks the overall average: 20 percent. The solid blue line, meanwhile, follows taxes as a percentage of GDP, and the dotted blue line marks the average: 18 percent.
What jumps out on the chart is that most recently both the spending and tax percentages are way out of whack with historic norms. The chart shows 2011 spending at 24.1 percent, not just significantly higher than the five-decade average of 20 percent, but much higher over the past few years than ever before. Meanwhile, it shows taxes at 15.4 percent, way below the 18 percent average and--over the past few years--lower than at any other time during the period.
To most partisans and ideologues, this chart is almost a Rorschach test. The eyes of liberals and Democrats tend immediately to go to the blue line that shows taxes in recent years running at historically low levels, while conservatives and Republicans' eyes immediately go to the red line showing spending in recent years at unprecedented levels--unprecedented, at least, in the past half-century or so.
The year-end fight was a clumsy way of dealing with the blue line, but the next fight is going to be much more about that red line, and that is not a fight that Democrats will want to see. So for all of the focus and talk about the cleavages within the GOP and how unrealistic Republicans' approach to taxes has been, we will now see a mirror-image debate over spending that will show Democrats to be equally culpable for the fiscal crisis that we find ourselves in.
Audit Report - Department of Energy's Management of Surplus Nuclear Materials DOE Inspector General January 16, 2013 We found the Department of Energy (Department) strengthened its nuclear materials management program by developing a life cycle nuclear materials management policy, implementing strategic plans for consolidation and disposition of nuclear materials and refining its nuclear materials management organization. However, we determined that challenges remain.
Despite requirements, the Department's Office of Nuclear Material Integration had formally proposed and gained Program and field element approval of only one Lead Material Management Organization (LMMO) to integrate and coordinate the management of specific nuclear materials. Some nuclear materials were being managed by de facto or provisional LMMOs. Also, although the Department's draft Strategic Plan concluded that specified surplus nuclear reactor components contain rare isotopes that are virtually irreplaceable and vulnerable to be processed as waste for permanent disposal, the Department had not designated certain nuclear materials as National Assets to enable their retention and continued availability.
We determined that Department officials are in discussions with program offices to designate additional LMMOs as warranted, and are working to identify materials for National Asset designation. We made two suggestions to further strengthen the nuclear materials management program. First, the Department should finalize its efforts to formally designate LMMOs to facilitate the integration and coordination of nuclear materials disposition; and second, complete the determination for the types and quantities of surplus nuclear materials containing valuable isotopes to be preserved for future programmatic and national needs before the opportunity is lost.
Los Alamos management gets contract extension despite low score
Gary Gerew, Albuquerque Business First January 17, 2013 Federal officials gave the Bechtel-University of California group that runs Los Alamos National Laboratory $59.7 million for managing the lab in 2012 and also gave Los Alamos National Security LLC a one-year contract extension through a "one-time waiver" that was granted by the National Nuclear Security Administration, despite LANS' failure to meet all the criteria for the extension.
LANS could have earned as much $74.5 million for the fiscal year and got 80 percent of that, according to the Albuquerque Journal. It was awarded $27.9 million in fixed fees and work for other entities and another $31.6 million as a so-called "at risk" fee based on performance.
The at-risk fee could have been as much as $46.5 million, but LANS got only 68 percent of the maximum. That was its lowest score since taking over the lab in 2006, according to the Nuclear Weapons and Materials Monitor.
LANS is supposed to earn at least 80 percent of the at-risk fee in order to win an "award term" extending the LANL management contract for an additional year.
That requirement was waived in this case by Neile Miller, NNSA's principal deputy administrator, according to reports by both the Nuclear Weapons and Materials Monitor and the Los Alamos Monitor, according to the Journal.
A Dec. 7 letter from an NNSA official said Miller "expressed a desire to award LANS the (contract extension) award in recognition of LANS' acceptance and accountability for problems" with a flawed security system at the lab and for "moving aggressively to correct the issues," according to the Journal report.
MOX plant costs, schedules questioned by lawmaker Rob Pavey, The Augusta Chronicle January 15, 2013 A key member of the U.S. House Energy & Commerce subcommittee is raising new questions about the construction schedule and eventual cost of the government's $4.8 billion mixed oxide fuel plant under construction at Savannah River Site.
Citing reports that the MOX plant "may be over budget, behind schedule and lacking even a single customer for its product," Rep. Edward Markey, D-Mass., has asked Energy Secretary Steven Chu for updated construction cost estimates for the project, along with a firm timeline for completion and operation.
The plant is designed to dispose of 34 metric tons of weapons-grade plutonium by blending it with uranium to make fuel for commercial power reactors, a process that renders the plutonium unusable for weapons.
"While there is near-universal agreement on the need for permanent disposal of our surplus weapons-grade plutonium, it is far from clear that the department's current plan is the most cost effective means of doing so," Markey wrote in a letter dated Monday.
Although the construction budget adopted in 2007 was $4.8 billion, Markey stated that the trade journal Nuclear Weapons & Materials Monitor cited an internal Department of Energy estimate that adds $2 billion to construction costs because of changes in commodity prices, personnel turnover and other factors.
The current schedule calls for the MOX fuel plant to open in 2016, with production of commercial fuel starting by 2018.
Limited ramp up of Hanford vit plant construction approved Annette Cary, Tri-City Herald January 15, 2013 Richland -- Construction at a key facility at the Hanford vitrification plant can begin to be ramped back up, Energy Secretary Steven Chu and Washington Gov. Chris Gregoire announced late this afternoon.
In addition, the Department of Energy is considering sending radioactive waste directly to the plant's treatment facilities before the Pretreatment Facility, which is plagued with technical issues, is completed.
Bypassing the Pretreatment Facility could help DOE meet a legal deadline to start treating waste for disposal in 2019.Construction remains on hold at the Pretreatment Facility, the largest facility on the vitrification plant campus.
But at a second key facility where construction has slowed, the High Level Waste Facility, building could resume in some areas.Gregoire, who leaves office after eight years as governor Wednesday, had pledged to get the $12.2 billion vitrification plant on track toward completion before leaving office.
"Over the past several months, the Department of Energy and the state of Washington have worked together closely to ensure the Waste Treatment Plant is on a stable path to resolving the technical issues, completing construction and beginning to treat waste in the coming years," the joint statement from Chu and Gregoire said.
Hanford cleanup continues as Gregoire steps down Shannon Dininny, Associated Press January 10, 2013 YAKIMA, Wash. (AP) - Washington Gov. Chris Gregoire takes with her more than two decades of experience fighting to clean up the nation's most contaminated nuclear site when she leaves office next week.
In the mid-1980s, Gregoire was a deputy state attorney general lobbying the U.S. government to disclose whether the Hanford nuclear reservation, created in secrecy in World War II to produce plutonium for the atomic bomb, posed any environmental or health risks.
As director of the state Department of Ecology, she helped negotiate a 1989 agreement requiring the federal government to clean up the site. She then served three terms as state attorney general and two terms as governor, often working to enforce that agreement.
Now preparing to leave elected office, Gregoire has emerged as one of the state's most stalwart proponents for cleaning up the site contaminated with toxic and radioactive waste.
"All the way along, it's been one challenge after another," Gregoire said in a recent interview. "Worker safety, community safety, the safety of the Columbia River - All were paramount in our minds, and we've really struggled to make sure the science behind the cleanup was right and we didn't compromise all those things."
At the height of World War II, the federal government enlisted 50,000 people for a hush-hush project to build the atomic bomb, making a remote stretch of land in south-central Washington the state's fourth-largest city. In just 13 months, they built the B Reactor, a first-of-its-kind facility that produced plutonium for the bomb that was dropped on Nagasaki, Japan, effectively ending the war.
Hanford went on to produce plutonium for the nation's nuclear weapons arsenal for decades, employing thousands of people and establishing the area as a science and technology center.
But the effects of those efforts remain: Nine nuclear reactors to be shut down and decontaminated, miles of groundwater tainted with radioactive elements, hundreds of burial pits filled with unknown debris.
Central to the cleanup is removing millions of gallons of highly toxic, radioactive stew - enough to fill dozens of Olympic-size swimming pools - from aging, underground tanks. Some of those tanks have leaked, threatening the groundwater and the neighboring Columbia River.
U.S. Rep. Doc Hastings, a Republican whose district includes Hanford, credited Gregoire for her efforts to negotiate the 1989 Tri-Party Agreement.
"I've always been one who believes, while this is a federal project, there should be just as many management decisions made at the local level," he said. "The TPA helps that, because it gets the state involved in those agreements. She obviously deserves credit."
Gregoire has garnered criticism at times, from environmental groups critical of the state for not demanding more of the federal government and from some local officials who wanted to include nuclear technologies in Hanford's future economic plans.
Carl Adrian, executive director of an economic development group there, noted that Gregoire failed to try to entice a nuclear fuel processing company to the region.
But he said she worked in lock-step with Washington's congressional delegation to ensure cleanup continued at Hanford.
"Clearly, she is an expert," he said, "and it was an advantage having her in the positions she's had as attorney general and governor."
A quarter of a century later, Gregoire said she never would have envisioned so much of her life in public service would be devoted to cleaning up one of the most polluted sites on Earth. She also said she remains confident the site will be fully remediated, despite technical problems that have slowed cleanup and driven up the price tag.
But she acknowledged she was naive to think the 1989 agreement would resolve problems there, because so much was unknown about Hanford then.
"We knew we didn't know everything, but little did we understand that records were not kept," she said. "We did not really appreciate or understand when we negotiated that agreement the complexity we were going to face."
SRS contractor earns praise, performance fee Rob Pavey, The Augusta Chronicle January 10, 2013 Savannah River Nuclear Solutions earned most of its fiscal 2012 performance fees, according to the U.S. Department of Energy.
The management contractor for Savannah River Site, which employs more than 4,500 workers, was eligible for up to $48,950,000 in "performance-based incentives," and was awarded $41,492,503 from the Department of Energy.
"In 2012, SRNS increased its emphasis on personal ownership of working safely, achieving 10 million safe hours without an injury resulting in lost time," DOE-Savannah River manager David Moody, said in a letter to SRNS president and CEO Dwayne Wilson.
"As a result of your outstanding performance, the department extended your contract for an additional 38 months," Moody wrote. "I can confidently say that Savannah River Site continues to operate from a position of balance and strength."
Moody also noted some criticisms that resulted in the award of less than the full amount.
The company's implementation of software to enhance procurement data collection "was not well managed," the letter said, and resulted in late payments to small business vendors, untimely purchase of critical spare parts and difficulty in meeting financial reporting requirements.
There were also missed deadlines associated with the Waste Solidification Building project that resulted in cost over-runs.
Other issues included schedule delays and cost overruns in activities leading to preparation of feed to support the mixed oxide fuel project.
Overall, however, the site's objectives were well-met. Highlighted accomplishments included:
|
|
