Todd Jacobson
NS&D Monitor
4/17/2015
The National Nuclear Security Administration won’t make a decision this year on adding the management of Savannah River tritium operations to Consolidated Nuclear Security’s Y-12/Pantex management and operating contract, NNSA Administrator Frank Klotz told employees at the Savannah River Site this week. In an April 16 visit to the site, Klotz told a meeting of NNSA federal and contractor employees at the site that a decision on management of the tritium work would not be made until next year, pushing off a controversial decision on the work.
The tritium work is currently part of Fluor-led Savannah River Nuclear Solutions’ site management and operating contract, and NS&D Monitor reported last year that the potential contract change has caused uncertainty among tritium workers, including some who have sought work elsewhere at the site because of the potential for a change in benefits. Klotz told employees that while CNS is performing well integrating Y-12 and Pantex, he wants them to focus on that work before potentially adding the tritium management to the Bechtel-led LLC’s plate. He also said the benefits and risks of the move, as well as the timing in the context of decisions on SRNS’ Office of Environmental Management contract at the site, would be considered. SRNS’ contract to run the site expires next year, though a contract option could extend the Fluor-led company’s deal through 2018.
S.C. Lawmakers Raised Concerns
The NNSA’s move to defer a decision comes as South Carolina lawmakers were raising concerns about the potential contract shift. In a December letter to Klotz, Rep. Joe Wilson (R-S.C.) and Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) sought to “better understand the Department’s reasoning behind this strategy and highlight the operational risks” associated with the potential move. “Creating a fully-severed tritium program with another M&O contractor could disrupt this organization and has the potential to disrupt the tritium mission,” Graham and Wilson wrote. “The fully severed tritium M&O contract would continue to rely on the existing M&O contractor for site services, lab support, and other mission critical support activities, however, accountability would be diffused between the two contractors. We are concerned that NNSA is considering altering a program that has direct national security implications and may not result in the best use of taxpayer dollars.”
Klotz promised a briefing to lawmakers on the NNSA’s plans, but that briefing hadn’t been scheduled as of earlier this week. “There are many variables that would have to be considered if we were to exercise this option,” Klotz said in a letter to Wilson last month. “The benefits and risks associated with these issues will be considered before making any final decision.”
‘Detrimental’ to the Mission?
In addition to creating workforce uncertainty, SRNS officials have argued that severing the tritium work would be harmful to work at the site. “I think removing tritium from the Savannah River Site’s contract regardless of the construct of the contract would be very detrimental to NNSA’s program,” SRNS President Carol Johnson said in October. “I think there are substantial mission risks associated with doing that.”
She said that tritium work is closely linked to work at Savannah River National Laboratory, as well as support services and other site systems. “Breaking that apart is complex and I’m not saying it can’t be done, I’m just saying it’s very complex and would, I think, put NNSA’s program at risk,” she said. She said that SRNS has prepared to sever the tritium work as required by its contract, but there are “still a lot of interfaces and a lot of infrastructure connections that are necessary.”
CNS has said it expects to save about $3.27 billion over 10 years through the merger of the sites. About $3 billion of that is cost savings at Y-12 and Pantex, and the remainder is cost savings projected if the tritium option is exercised.
