Here’s some of the news Weapons Complex Monitor tracked over the last two weeks during the Exchange Monitor’s publishing break for the winter holidays.
Navarro-led Hanford Laboratory Management and Integration this week began the process of taking over the Department of Energy’s 222-S Laboratory at the Hanford Site in Washington state.
Located in the 200-West Area of the former plutonium complex, the primary purpose of the 70,000 square foot lab is to provide analytical support for the storage and treatment of Hanford tank waste. In a Dec. 28 statement, DOE’s Office of River Protection said Hanford Laboratory Management and Integration (HLMI) would start its 100-day transition to take over the lab on Jan. 5, which was Tuesday.
At the end of the 100 days, which would be April 15, the Navarro Research and Engineering-led team will take over both the Laboratory Analysis and Testing Services work now done by the former Wastren Advantage — now part of Veolia — and the laboratory operations work done under the Tank Operations Contract prime contract held by Amentum-led Washington River Protection Solutions.
The incoming contractor has launched a new website, DOE said.
HLMI, made up of Navarro and Advanced Technologies and Laboratories International, landed the potentially $389 million contract in September. The agreement has a five-year base period and two one-year option periods.
The Department of Energy’s Office of Environmental Management said Dec. 21 that it has transferred the Separations Process Research Unit in New York from the nuclear cleanup office to the DOE Office of Naval Reactors as of Dec. 16.
The DOE announced the transfer of the 30-acre Separations Process Research Unit (SPRU) areas from the Office of Environmental Management to the Office of Naval Reactors, in a press release.
The milestone resulted from a joint effort between DOE, the naval reactors office, and the Knolls Atomic Power Laboratory in Niskayuna, N.Y., where the SPRU properties are located.
“Completing the SPRU project removes the longstanding liability of a Cold War-era nuclear facility and enables returning the former SPRU areas to the Naval Reactors landlord for future site operations. Significant credit is due to the government-contractor team that completed this project,” said Hugh Davis, program manager for SPRU, in the press release.
The SPRU facility housed an old pilot plant used in the 1950s for research and development of chemical processes to separate plutonium from other radioactive material at the Knolls Atomic Power Laboratory.
There are 24 containers of transuranic waste remaining at the site on a storage pad, a DOE spokesperson confirmed this week. The agency plans to commercially treat a portion of this waste to allow for low-level waste disposal, with the rest eventually being disposed of at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant in New Mexico.
The Government Accountability Office says Hanford Tank Closure Co., made up of Atkins, Amentum and Westinghouse Government Services, is not entitled reimbursement of its legal costs for protesting a $13-billion tank closure contract issued in May by the Department of Energy.
In a decision published in December, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) said the protesting contractor did not merit reimbursement. DOE cancelled the Tank Closure solicitation just before Christmas.
The Atkins-led group filed its bid protest in May just after DOE awarded the 10-year Hanford Tank Closure Contract to BWX Technologies-led Hanford Works Restoration. The agency put the award on hold in July.
In the Nov. 16 decision posted weeks later on the office’s website, GAO General Counsel Thomas Armstrong said the federal watchdog was unwilling to conclude that the challenge was “clearly meritorious” and warranted expense reimbursement.
The Atkins-led team argued the BWXT-led group created the appearance of impropriety when it brought in a recently-retired manager of the Hanford Richland Operations Office to assist in preparation of the bid.
Sources identified the former Richland manager as Doug Shoop, who retired in February 2019. The Department of Energy, however, pushed back against this argument, according to the document. DOE said Hanford’s Office of River Protection, and not the Richland Operations Office, is responsible for overseeing the Tank Closure Contract. The Office of River Protection is a “stand-alone office,” separate from Richland, the DOE argued.
The DOE’s contracting officer for the procurement interviewed the retired manager and DOE representatives involved with the procurement planning and reviewed various emails before finding the BWXT group did not have a conflict of interest.
The Atkins-led team also made various other arguments common to losing contractors, questioning DOE’s reasoning and analysis into whether the award winner provided the best value for the government.
As of early today, Jan. 8, no companies have filed challenges with the Government Accountability Office to contest the Dec. 10 award of the new $160-million Paducah Infrastructure Support Services Contract to Kentucky-based Swift & Staley.
The Department of Energy received four bids for the contract, an agency spokesperson said Dec. 17. The spokesperson did not respond to an inquiry on when debrief sessions were being held for the runners up.
Losing companies must typically file challenges with the Government Accountability Office (GAO) within 10 days of learning details of the federal contracting selection decision.
Days after the award, an official with another mid-sized DOE contractor expressed doubt that the infrastructure services award will be contested. The company for which the contractor works did not bid because Swift & Staley seemed a good bet to retain the business, this person said. Officials with two other contractors said they did not know when the debriefs were being held or if the award would be challenged.
The Paducah-based, employee-owned Swift & Staley provides facility support services, safeguards & security and automated access control services, administrative support and records management.
