Kenneth Fletcher
WC Monitor
2/7/2014
B&W Conversion Services, LLC, the managing contractor for the Department of Energy’s two depleted uranium hexafluoride conversion plants, earned approximately 66 percent of the total fee available for Fiscal Year 2013—$2.93 million out of $4.44 million, according to information DOE released this week. The contractor’s fee includes an incentive portion based on the amount of DUF6 processed during the period—the contractor is paid $77 per metric ton. During the last evaluation period, BWCS processed 13,578 metric tons, earning $1.05 million, according to a one-page fee scorecard. BWCS’ fee also included $1.88 million out of an available $2.16 million (87 percent) in award fee. The contractor said this week that it is is happy with DOE’s FY’13 assessment. “We’re pleased that PPPO [the DOE Portsmouth/Paducah Project Office] had so many good things to say about the work we did last year. It was a challenging year and we appreciate being rewarded for it,” BWCS President George Dials said in a statement.
The two DUF6 conversion plants, located at DOE’s Portsmouth and Paducah sites, are intended to help disposition more than 700,000 metric tons of material stored in thousands of cylinders at the two sites. BWCS—made up of B&W and URS—took over as the plants’ operating contractor from Uranium Disposition Services in the spring of 2011. In its fee scorecard, DOE said that BWCS “met the majority of performance goals and objectives” for FY 2013. “Significant achievements include multiple simultaneous line operation of each plant, maintaining a safety conscious work environment with [Total Recordable Case] rates below goals, safe handling of over 2 million gallons of hydrofluoric acid, and prompt performance of cylinder transfers to support DOE initiatives,” the scorecard states.
BWCS Gets Three ‘Very Good’ Ratings
BWCS earned an “excellent” rating in quality and effectiveness of cylinder management, according to a Jan. 16 fee determination letter from DOE obtained this week by WC Monitor. “BWCS completed more than the required minimum number of cylinder inspections during this period. BWCS supported DOE in meeting commitments made to Energy Northwest by transferring high assay tails to the United States Enrichment Corporation ahead of schedule,” the letter says. The contractor earned a rating of “very good” in three categories: Safety, Health and Quality Assurance, Quality of Nuclear Safety and Quality Culture and Quality of Technical Problem Solving. Positive achievements noted by DOE for safety, health and QA include: “Lessons Learned are shared between the plants between operations managers and engineers. There is an ongoing effort to improve this process. Significant improvement has been made in sharing lessons learned between the operations and engineering organization at each site,” according to the letter.
However, the letter adds, “Although improving, the implementation of initial event and condition reporting continues to be weaker than expected with several incidents not being thoroughly reviewed for understanding and broader corrective actions.” In the nuclear safety area, “Management demonstrates a personal commitment to everyone’s safety. Team work and mutual respect has improved. The maintenance organization at Portsmouth has periodically exhibited difficulties in this area. BWCS management has made a special effort to capture issues brought up during the morning maintenance meetings,” according to the letter. A number of improvements were also noted in the technical problem solving area. “Numerous emergent issues were encountered during this period. BWCS effectively corrected many of the emergent issues. This is evidenced by improved throughput and plant availability,” the letter states.
‘Good’ Rating for Project Management
BWCS earned a “good” rating in quality and effectiveness of project support, and quality and effectiveness of project management. “The overall period cost and schedule performance was good. The combined plant production exceeded the target and overall cost was less than expected by the [fiscal year work plan],” the letter notes. It adds, “Cost reporting was below the expected standard for the second and third quarters. The level of management reserve was not always clear due to the manner in which BWCS mixes management reserve between years and across sites.”
