The Richland Operations Office will review how its prime contractors at the Hanford Site in Washington state are passing down nuclear quality assurance requirements to subcontractors and qualifying them after questions were raised about the recently completed River Corridor Closure Contract. A Department of Energy Inspector General’s Office audit report released on Feb. 17 found quality-assurance weaknesses in subcontracts managed by former site cleanup provider Washington Closure Hanford.
Failing to pass down quality assurance requirements to subcontractors led to issues, including at the 618-10 Burial Ground, the report said, noting that the site contains some of the most hazardous wastes at Hanford. Radiation detection probes used to identify the types of radioactive materials in vertical pipe units before remediation began failed calibration checks 92 percent of the time, the report said. However, the probes still were used to collect data at the burial ground. If certain nuclear quality assurance requirements had been in place, the probes could have been required to be removed from service until they were fixed, according to the report.
The mandatory criteria also would have required reviewing the data collected, the audit report said.
The IG found Washington Closure Hanford did not always effectively ensure that subcontractors could fully implement a quality assurance program. In November 2012, a subcontractor had a near-miss during construction of a temporary wall needed to help in lifting a 1,100-ton cement vault once used to store radioactive waste. The vault had to be transported to the Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility in central Hanford for disposal.
“Three days into construction, the wall collapsed, spilling more than 95 cubic yards of wet concrete and ecology blocks into a previously occupied work area,” the report said. The root cause analysis of the event showed weaknesses in the subcontractor’s ability to follow a quality assurance program, according to the DOE IG. The report recommended the Richland Operations Office evaluate the costs associated with the wall failure.
Washington Closure Hanford had no comment on the IG’s report. The partnership of AECOM, Bechtel, and CH2M Hill managed the $2.9 billion River Corridor Closure project from 2005 to 2016, including remediation of nearly 600 waste sites and demolition of more than 300 buildings.
In one case reviewed, inspectors found that some nuclear quality assurance was required in a subcontract even though the work posed no risk to safety or mission. The subcontract included moving mobile offices and restrooms at Hanford. “Had WCH considered flowing down less rigorous quality requirements, it may have achieved the same results at a lower cost,” the report said. Washington Closure management told the investigators the quality assurance requirements were for a hypothetical worst-case scenario, the report says.
The Richland Operations Office generally agreed with the IG’s recommendations, including conducting a quality assurance review of existing prime contractors’ subcontracting. The review should be completed in September, it said. The DOE office also will review and evaluate the reimbursed subcontract costs for the wall that collapsed. The $270,894 cost might be recovered from Washington Closure or offset, DOE said.