Kenneth Fletcher
WC Monitor
6/12/2015
After delays and cost increases at Hanford’s Plutonium Finishing Plant were highlighted last fall in a report prepared by the Department of Energy’ Office of Inspector General, cleanup contractor CH2M Hill Plateau Remediation Company aims to implement a host of corrective actions, according to a plan recently released by DOE. The IG report found issues with CHPRC’s ability to plan, manage and execute work, which contributed to the delays and cost increases in the major D&D project, currently scheduled to be completed by September 2016. The corrective action plan, completed by DOE and CHPRC in January but only released publicly this month, details two root causes for the issues and a contributing cause. “CHPRC has encountered problems with consistently planning, managing and executing work in an efficient manner. This has contributed to delays as measured against CHPRC’s plan,” the plan says. DOE and CHPRC this week did not respond to request for comment on how many of the corrective actions have been implemented so far.
D&D work at the former plutonium processing facility was originally expected to be complete by September 2013 for a total of $581 million, but now is not slated for completion until September 2016 for a total of $932 million, according to the IG report released in September 2014. The IG report noted that progress had been made since the issues came to light, but that more work remained. In the corrective action plan two root causes were identified. The first states that “CHPRC does not consistently utilize existing systems and processes to identify, trend, address and track to closure productivity issues.” The second found that “CHPRC has insufficient requirements and established protocol to address work execution issues that may impact productivity.”
Among the suggested corrective actions, CHPRC is to better define expectations, develop data capture capabilities, develop processes to integrate output and trending of productivity issues, conduct routine review meetings, conduct an assessment on the effectiveness of its risk management program, communicate changes to requirements, and communicate to CHPRC personnel upcoming changes to requirements. A “contributing cause” to the issues is that “CHPRC has not conducted formal assessments of productivity issues,” according to the plan. It notes: “Failing to utilize the CHPRC assessment process to identify and document productivity challenges has contributed to management continuing to encounter similar issues. Formal assessment of operational inefficiency would allow CHPRC managers to look ‘wider’ than the individual issue of the moment.”
