The contractor that operates the U.S. Department of Energy’s Savannah River Site in South Carolina has mismanaged security incident reports over the past two years, with problems ranging from late submission of documents to the federal agency to providing incomplete information when they are delivered.
In one instance, Savannah River Nuclear Solutions (SRNS) was supposed to close out a report within 90 days. However, it did so in November 2018 – 762 days after the deadline, according to an Aug. 20 letter from the DOE Office of Enforcement, a branch of the Office of Enterprise Assessments.
The letter was sent to SRNS President and CEO Stuart MacVean and came in response to worries that SRNS does not have a stable program in place to address incidents of security concerns (IOSCs): any actions or events that pose a threat to DOE’s protection program. These worries include two years in which Savannah River Nuclear Solutions failed to submit timely incident reports.
During a review of the contractor’s IOSC program, the Enforcement Office evaluated 21 Category A reports submitted from fiscal years 2016 through 2018. Category A incidents could include impacts to nuclear materials, firearms, or security. The letter did not provide details of specific incidents.
Of the 21 reports, eight were submitted past DOE’s mandatory five-day notification period. And 16 “significantly exceeded the 90-day closure period,” Kevin Dressman, director of the Enforcement Office, wrote in the letter. In addition, when final reports were submitted, several did not include important information, such as chronological sequences of events before and after the incidents.
Following the review, officials from the Office of Enforcement visited the site from April 2-4 of this year to gain a better understanding of the contractor’s IOSC program. Officials interviewed key personnel and reviewed relevant documents. They found that SRNS had made progress in providing timely and complete documentation, but still had some issues. These include the IOSC program being driven by individual workers, rather than being “based on formal processes and procedures,” Dressman wrote.
