Kenneth Fletcher
WC Monitor
1/17/2014
The Department of Energy and Parsons began formal negotiations on commissioning and startup of the Savannah River Site’s Salt Waste Processing Facility just before the holidays, but it is uncertain when they may wrap up talks, a DOE official said this week. While DOE and Parsons reached an agreement-in-principle last June on the construction portion of the plant, the parties have yet to make a deal on startup, and reviews have warned that delays could lead to issues at the project. “I can’t give you a date on when we will be done. We have started negotiations and hopefully we’ll get through those when everybody is satisfied with the conditions to get to an agreement in principle,” Ken Picha, the Office of Environmental Management’s Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for Tank Waste and Nuclear Materials Management, told WC Monitor this week on the sidelines of a Institute of Nuclear Materials Management meeting.
DOE’s fact finding process for the startup talks begin in September, Picha said, adding, “But we didn’t get the full go ahead until right before the holidays.” He said that the extended period before startup contract talks began was due to the process that must be undertaken before negotiations. “We have a very formal procurement process within the Department and making sure that we adhere to all the requirements and policies and guidelines to establish how we would proceed,” he said. DOE Savannah River Operations Office spokesman Jim Giusti said this week, “DOE is continuing discussions with Parsons regarding Salt Waste Processing Facility contract modifications for the startup and commissioning phases of the project. The project continues to make positive progress toward the completion of construction.” Parsons this week referred request for comment to DOE.
Review Warned of Impacts of Startup Talk Delays
The SWPF is part of DOE’s plans to greatly increase the rate of waste processing at the Savannah River tank farms. However, DOE and Parsons have had to negotiate a new contract for the project since Parsons submitted a revised estimate-at-completion in March 2012. That increased the project’s total cost by more than $400 million largely due to subcontractor delays in delivery of key components, which breached the cost cap and made a new contract necessary. The new agreement reached last year covered only construction and pushed out completion of the facility from 2014 to late 2016, with commissioning and start-up to be covered by a future agreement. But given the extended contract talks for construction and previously reported tensions between Parsons and DOE, it is uncertain when an agreement on startup may be reached.
A recent DOE Construction Project Review called for completion of commissioning and startup talks by Oct. 31, 2013, in order to “prevent further deterioration of critical resources necessary to transition from construction to operations,” adding that further delay could “adversely affect both project cost and schedule performance with loss of experienced commissioning and test personnel anticipated” (WC Monitor, Vol. 24 No. 38). But Picha said this week that it has not been an issue so far. “Our [Federal Project Director] hasn’t mentioned anything about an imminent loss of folks. I think they were being prudent in their recommendation or admonition to try and get things wrapped up as soon as we can, but I know that we would be informed if there was imminent loss of some of the key folks,” he said.
