Parsons carried out four proficiency drills between July and September at the Salt Waste Processing Facility (SWPF), which is expected to open in December at the Department of Energy’s Savannah River Site in South Carolina
The contractor in charge of building and starting up the plant plans five more drills through November, according to a weekly site report filed Sept. 20 by staff at the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board (DNFSB). Two Parsons management teams devoted to operational readiness were to observe an Oct. 3 drill at the site.
The DNFSB document did not provide details regarding what the drills entailed.
Parsons signed a $2 billion contract with DOE in 2002 to design, build, test, and start up the processing facility no later than January 2021. Construction was completed in June 2016, and Parsons began testing and commissioning.
Parsons has yet to deliver a corrective action plan to the Energy Department to address shortcomings in the emergency management system, after the agency found a draft plan unsatisfactory because it lacked adequate detail about fixing problems.
In a Sept. 6 report, the DNFSB said past drills showed deficiencies in areas including radiation control, command post and incident scene coordination, and coordination with fire department.
The Savannah River Site is home to more than 35 million gallons of radioactive waste left by nuclear-weapon work during the Cold War. The $2.3 billion, 140,000-square-foot Salt Waste Processing Facility should process roughly 30 million gallons of radioactive salt waste stored in decades-old underground tanks. The new facility will remove cesium from the salt waste and transfer the remaining salt solution to Salt Disposal Units.
The Energy Department and Parsons initially wanted the SWPF to start operating in 2018, but the plant is still ahead of the contracted January 2021 deadline.
AECOM-led site waste contractor Savannah River Remediation, in a plan issued earlier this year, predicted a May 2020 startup for the SWPF.
Deadline slippage and readiness of the plant have been a source of dispute between Parsons and the Energy Department.
