(2).jpg)
Todd Jacobson
NS&D Monitor
1/9/2015
Kansas City National Security Campus contractor Honeywell Federal Manufacturing & Technologies was the top performer in the weapons complex during Fiscal Year 2014, earning 96 percent of its at risk fee ($28.8 million out of $30 million available). Honeywell also earned an additional $14.4 million in fixed Work For Others fee, bringing its total FY 2014 fee to $43.1 million. The National Nuclear Security Administration last week released the FY 2014 Fee Determination Letters, providing top-level information about the fee earned by its contractors, but has not released the full Performance Evaluation Reviews.
Honeywell scored above 90 percent in each of five rating categories, scoring highest in Leadership (98 percent), Nuclear Weapons Mission (97 percent) and Broader National Security Mission (97 percent). It also earned 96 percent in Science, Technology and Engineering, and 92 percent in Operations and Infrastructure, drawing praise for how it handled the move into a new facility. The move was completed this summer. “FM&T provided excellent leadership managing the KCRIMS move while maintaining continuous product deliveries through detailed build ahead planning,” NNSA Principal Deputy Administrator Madelyn Creedon wrote in the contractor’s Fee Determination Letter. “FM&T leadership also provided excellent corporate parent support with welcomed proactive involvement.”
Livermore Contractor Scores 87 Percent, Earns Award Term Extension
While Los Alamos National Laboratory contractor Los Alamos National Security earned only 9 percent of its fee and didn’t earn an award-term extension (see related story), Lawrence Livermore contractor Lawrence Livermore National Security earned 87 percent of its at-risk fee ($23.9 million out of $27.6 million available) and a one-year extension to its contract, pushing its expiration to Fiscal Year 2018. Overall, it earned $42.3 million, including $11.8 million in fixed fee and $6.5 million in fixed Work For Others fee. LLNS earned its highest score in Science, Technology and Engineering, earning 93 percent of the available fee in that category. “LLNS is being recognized for significantly improving the utilization of the National Ignition Facility (NIF) and sharing that capability within the NNSA enterprise,” Creedon wrote.
Lockheed Martin’s Sandia Corporation earned 81.2 percent of its at-risk fee ($7.9 million out of $9.8 million available), penalized most significantly for Operations and Infrastructure, where it earned 65 percent of the available fee in that category ($1.3 million out of $1.9 million). Overall, Sandia earned $26.3 million, including $10.9 million in fixed fee and $7.3 million in fixed Work For Others fee. Creedon noted in the Fee Determination Letter that the lab had challenges during FY 2014 in transparency and maintaining communication with the NNSA. “I expect to see positive changes with the new Sandia leadership to address the challenges presented in 2014 that strained the relationship with the NNSA,” Creedon wrote, adding: “Sandia’s commitment to the positive and cooperative relationship has been modest and falls short of what is expected of a FFRDC. We look forward to an improved relationship in 2015.” Notably, Sandia announced late last year that Stephen Rottler, the head of its California site and the head of its Energy and Climate unit, would be taking over as its deputy director and executive vice president for National Security Programs effective March 6. He succeeds Jerry McDowell, who will retire in July after 35 years at Sandia.
NSTec Earns 83.4 Percent of Fee
Nevada National Security Site contractor National Security Technologies was awarded 83.4 percent of its at-risk fee ($21.3 million out of $25.6 million), taking a significant hit in Operations and Infrastructure (68 percent) for several high-profile slipups, including a June chemical explosion. The NNSA also said NSTec continued to experience “technical and management issues” in support of Source Physics Experiment(SPE) execution, but welcomed recent changes at the site. “NSTec responded with focused management attention, outstanding parent corporation support, and major operational changes that indicate a heightened level of commitment and focus that had been lacking,” Creedon wrote. “It is anticipated NSTec will maintain this heightened focus in order to resolve the on-going technical and management issues in support of SPE experiment execution as well as lead to the improvement of the systemic downward trends experienced in FY 2014.”
B&W Y-12 and B&W Pantex received their grades for Oct. 1, 2013 to June 30, 2014, when Consolidated Nuclear Security took over management of the sites. B&W Pantex earned 90 percent of its at-risk fee ($26.1 million out of $28.9 million available), while B&W Y-12 earned 78 percent of its at-risk fee ($44.7 million out of $57.6 million available). It was B&W Y-12’s best performance since before the July 2012 security breach at the site after back-to-back years earning less than 60 percent of its award fee. “B&W’s performance evaluations reflect our continued commitment to safe, secure and highly effective operations,” B&W spokeswoman Aimee Mills said. “Our teams at both Y-12 and Pantex maintained a high degree of professionalism while achieving significant performance throughout FY 2014, which included a complex transition process. We remain committed to providing the U.S. Department of Energy and National Nuclear Security Administration with exceptional talent and technical capabilities.” The NNSA said CNS’ first report card will be for the 15-month period running from July 1, 2014, to Sept. 30, 2015.
SRNS Earns 75 Percent of Fee for NNSA Work at Savannah River
Savannah River Nuclear Solutions received 75 percent of its at-risk fee for the NNSA portion of its work at the Savannah River Site ($16 million out of $21.2 million available), taking its most significant hit in Operations and Infrastructure (60 percent) and Broader National Security Mission (60 percent), though it scored well in Nuclear Weapons Mission (92 percent). Creedon noted that SRNS earned no fee for work on the Waste Solidification Building. “Senior management engagement and use of corporate reach-back assets to improve schedule performance on the Waste Solidification Building (WSB) were a step in the right direction,” she wrote. “However, I am disappointed that SRNS did not obtain certification of the Earned Value Management System, which NNSA relies upon as a critical tool for evaluating project performance against approved baselines.”
