Project Manager’s Assessment · 2018. 12. 17. · Project Manager’s Assessment Safety and Health Through June 30, 2018, WRPS Tank Operations Contract (TOC) had worked 7,193,686

TOC Monthly Performance Report May 2018 Page 2

Project Manager’s Assessment

Safety and Health

Through June 30, 2018, WRPS Tank Operations Contract (TOC) had worked 7,193,686 hours (508 days) without a

Lost Time Workday Injury, and 3,299,255 hours (226 days) since the last Recordable case. The Fiscal Year (FY) 2018

cumulative case rate for Recordable cases (0.05) and days away, restricted, or transferred (DART) cases (0.00)

surpassed the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), Office of Environmental Management (EM) goals of 1.10 and 0.60,

respectively. Additionally, the 12-month rolling average safety rates remained low, with a rate of 0.08 for Recordable

cases and 0.00 for DART cases.

Project Highlights

Overall performance for the TOC cost performance index (CPI) is favorable and schedule performance index (SPI) is

unfavorable, with a cumulative-to-date CPI of 1.00 and SPI of 0.99. The FY 2018 CPI is 0.99 with the FY SPI at 0.97.

Waste Feed Delivery

Tank-Side Cesium Removal (TSCR): Negotiations with the recommended design/build vendor were completed and the

subcontract finalized. The recommended vendor was placed on the Hanford site evaluated supplier’s list in preparation

for subcontract award. Contract negotiations were initiated with the DOE Office of River Protection (ORP) to place the

TSCR work on the TOC. Two Request for Proposals (RFP) were issued for technology testing activities, one for batch

contact testing and the other for tall ion exchange (IX) column testing. A subcontract award was placed with Pacific

Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) to perform tall IX column testing. Final review comments on the Safety Design

Strategy document were received and are being incorporated. It is anticipated that ORP approval to award will occur

July 2018.

Tank Farm Upgrades to Support TSCR: Specifications, scope of work, requisitions, and blanket master agreement

(BMA) releases are completed for the TSCR Infrastructure design and TSCR IX column storage pad design. The

subcontractor is proceeding with the design scope under a Not-to-Exceed release, pending final procurement award of

the BMA releases.

Tank Farm Upgrades to Support Low-Activity Waste Pre-Treatment System (LAWPS): The final design for the AP-

105 Pit jumper is forecasted in August 2018. The jumper design is the only scope remaining to complete the, “Design of

AP-105 Tank Farm Upgrades,” milestone.

Tank Farm Upgrades to Support Initial Waste Feed Delivery: Final limited notices to proceed were issued to the Tank

Farm Project Upgrades contractor for all scopes regarding the Upgrades project, including the Low-Activity Waste

(LAW) Feed (AP Farm Waste Feed transfer and pit work) design, LAW Feed (W-211 to Interface Control Document

[ICD] 30) design, AP Pit pump removal to support LAW (design), and AP Pit pump removal to support LAW (removal

equipment).

Low Activity Waste Pretreatment System

WRPS processed a Baseline Change Request in May 2018, RPP-18-135, to further align the Performance Measurement

Baseline through FY18 with the recently submitted CP-18-007 proposal (permanent cesium removal capability) and to

continue the efforts to transition the LAWPS design from its current state to a simplified LAWPS facility.

The A/E continued to proceed with design execution efforts supporting the 45% design review meetings. The initial

reviews are currently planned to be completed next period in July 2018; incorporation of comments will follow. During

June 2018, the project also continued detail plans for the second design phase from the 45% design review meeting to

design completion. Constructability reviews on the 45% design effort proceeded during June 2018 as well. WRPS and

ORP continued working with the Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology) to formulate an integrated

approach that considers LAWPS, TSCR, and tank farm upgrades.

On April 27, 2018, WRPS received direction to realign the W-211 to ICD-30 Waste Transfer Lines (WTL) scope from

the Tank Farms Upgrade Proposal CP-18-006, to the LAWPS Proposal CP-18-007. The project has initiated efforts to

submit the necessary errata documentation to both proposals to amend the proposals prior to negotiations.

During June, WRPS provided support to ORP to draft a change in the LAWPS project efforts. The direction will clarify

the capitalization of selected LAWPS components such as the TSCR system, and the Direct Feed Low Activity Waste

feed delivery systems, direct WRPS to take appropriate procurement action(s) to preserve design activities for the


LAWPS permanent cesium removal capability pending project re-evaluation beginning as early as 2021, and submit a

response with a path forward describing necessary actions to update the proposals.

WRPS expects to receive the formal change in direction from ORP next period, in July 2018.

Test Bed Initiative (TBI): WRPS and Columbia Energy & Environmental Services team members met to review the

initial design concept for the TBI demonstration of 2,000 gallons. The purpose of the initiative is to demonstrate

pretreatment and commercial offsite stabilization and disposal at a facility in Texas. Next, the team will conduct a

hazards evaluation, provide input to the design, complete design, and begin fabrication of the pretreatment equipment.

The pretreatment of waste will happen in the 242-A Evaporator between campaigns, with AW-102 as the feed tank.

Single-Shell Tank Retrieval

C-105 Retrieval: The ORP is scheduled to transmit the C-105 Retrieval Completion Certification report (RPP-RPT-

60717) and WRPS sub-certification to Ecology the week of June 25, 2018. Submittal of this report will complete

consent decree milestone D-16B-0.

Gamma/Radionuclide Assessment System (RAS) scanning of the 10 C-105 dry wells is complete. Gamma/RAS scans

and a retrieval life cycle leak detection monitoring report are required inputs to the C-105 Retrieval Data Report (RDR).

The C-105 RDR provides technical and historical input to the tank closure process. The RDR is scheduled to be issued

in early FY19 to complete Tri-Party Agreement Milestone M-45-86d.

C Farm Lay-up: Crews disconnected High Resolution Resistivity Leak Detection Monitoring cables inside C Farm and

staged for disposal. Crews completed disconnecting C Farm electrical racks and remaining raw water lines.

Performance Based Incentive PBI-35.0.5 to complete isolation and layup of the POR107 exhauster is scheduled to be

completed in July 2018.

Hose-in-Hose Transfer Line (HIHTL): Twelve HIHTLs installed between C Farm and AN Farm have been

disconnected and are in the process of being removed from trenches and loaded into roll-off containers for shipment to

Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility (ERDF) for final disposal. Backfill of hose trenches will follow. AN-106

HIHTL hose segments were packaged for shipment to PNNL for service life evaluation. Performance Based Incentives

PBI-35.0.1.1 (8 HIHTL) and PBI-35.0.1.2 (4 HIHTL) for hose removal are on track for July 2018 field finish.

Mobile Gamma Scanner: Component testing and fabrication are ongoing for the new Mobile Gamma Scanner. Final

testing and delivery to WRPS is forecasted to complete by September 2018.

AX Farm Equipment Removal: Crews continued AX-102 Pit C Riser 01A pump removal demobilization activities

and AX-104 Pit B Riser 14 pump engineering removal calculations and lift plan. The pump was removed from the

tank, placed into waste container, and transferred to shield cave for shipment preparation.

AX Farm Retrieval Infrastructure: Crews continued installing conduit from AY Farm East to AX Farm, and

continued bedding and backfill of conduit runs. Crews also continued digging electrical conduit trenching running

north-south through AX Farm. Transportation of underground water and chemical piping spools to inside the A-Farm

gate began. The underground piping is the final section to be installed between the 241-A-285 Air and Water Service

Building and the POR-496 splitter manifold. The project completed installation of two PBI milestones. The letters

were submitted to ORP on May 31, 2018 for PBI-36.0.11.1 and PBI-36.0.11.2 “Complete install of water/chemical

piping from 241-A-285 to A-Farm fence.” Additionally, the project completed fieldwork on PBI-36.0.10 installation of

AX-102/AX-104 control trailer POR-471 on June 22, 2018. The PBI completion letter for this scope is planned to be

submitted to ORP by July 31, 2018.

Tank Farm Projects

Effluent Treatment Facility (ETF)/Liquid Effluent Retention Facility (LERF) Cover Basin Replacement: The

subcontractor has started removal of the LERF basin #42 liner. Two sections of liner have been removed, and the crew

is on a six day, ten hours per day shift to recover schedule. Removal of the cover is forecast to finish July 2018, to be

followed by new cover placement in August 2018.

SX Barrier – South Construction: The excavation and grading at the South SX Farm barrier footprint is 40% complete

in preparation for asphalt placement, which is forecast to begin August 2018. Installation of in-farm protective

structures is 50% complete. Crews are working on a six day, ten hours per days shift to recover schedule. The RFP was

issued for performance of the SX Barrier expansion.

Double-Shell Tank (DST) Transfer Pump Replacements: The cover blocks have been removed from the AW-103

pump pit and temporarily replaced with cover plates; the field crew completed coring and welding of the cover blocks.


Work in the pit to prepare for pump removal will proceed in mid-July 2108. Removal of the pump is forecast for late

July 2018 followed by installation of the new pump in early August 2018.

DST Integrity Ultrasonic Testing (UT): The UT of AZ-101 is complete; a review of the remaining weld scan data will

determine if there are any areas that require rescan. The UT subcontractor and support crew have demobilized from AZ-

101 and mobilized to AZ-102. Will begin wall scrubbing at the end of June 2018 in preparation for UT of AZ-102.

Grab Sampling: The sampling crew completed the post recirculation sampling of AZ-102 in early June 2018. This is

the ninth sampling iteration completed during FY18. The next sample planned is for the AW-102 tank to support TBI

scope during July 2018.

Comprehensive Vapors Action Plan

Strobic® Air Dilution Fan: Efforts focused on the Strobic® Air Dilution Fan off-site testing. The test plan, design, and

equipment list, all in support of off-site testing, have been approved. The damages to the fan incurred during shipping

from the Strobic® factory have been repaired. The unit is ready for testing.

Cartridge Testing and SCBA Alternatives: The PNNL draft report of air-purifying respirator (APR) testing, performed

in SX Farm in June 2017 began circulating. The report for powered air purifying respirator (PAPR) cartridge testing

conducted at SX-101 and SX-104 was released. Recent cartridge testing data collected from the AX Exhauster has been

analyzed and the report is in draft. Air purifying respirator and PAPR testing was completed in AW Farm. Samples have

been sent to PNNL for analysis, which will be conducted through the end of FY18. WRPS is currently reviewing results

for previously tested AX Farm. Analysis of cartridges from testing at AP Stack and BY Farm is currently underway.

NUCON® Thermal Oxidation Vapor Abatement Unit: The engineering-scale testing concluded. Work continued on

the technical demonstration conceptual design for Tank BY-108, including resolving comments from the 60%

conceptual design package, and in parallel, work continues on the 90% conceptual design package. WRPS Engineering

is finalizing the standards to be used in the design.

AW Stack Extension: Preparation of the non-radiological and radiological permit applications continued; both permits

are with ORP for review. The AW stack concrete structure was completed during June 2018. The steel portion of the

stack will be assembled to the height currently referenced in the environmental permit and anchored to the cured

concrete structure. Once the environmental permitting is complete, the final portion of the steel stack will be lifted into

place. Drilling and rebar dowel placement is close to completion; the use of rebar dowels will facilitate bonding of

existing mud mat to the concrete columns.

Vapor Monitoring & Detection Systems Upgrades: Work package was released for 702-AZ stack monitor construction.

Excavation and site-preparation fieldwork have commenced. The work package for AN exhauster stack monitor

construction is drafted and entering Work Order Review and Approval (WORA) for final review. Site-preparation

fieldwork is anticipated to start in early July 2018. Fabrication of the Ultra-Violet-Differential Optical Absorption

Spectrometer stack monitor units continues at Cerex Monitoring Solutions and Factory Acceptance Testing is scheduled

for early July 2018, with delivery in late July 2018. Design packages for AW and AX stack monitoring are in final

approvals and nearing release.

Tank Farms Public Address (PA) Systems Support: Termination of wire and installation of poles and speakers for the

Tank Farms PA system is 95% complete in S, SX, and SY Farms. Installation of poles and speakers in T, TX, and TY

Farms will occur in reporting month July 2018. Functional testing in these farms is forecast for reporting month July

2018. Crash gates were installed in the AP and AW Farms. The reader boards have been delivered and are being

processed through acquisition verification services.

Production Operations

Tank Waste Volume Management: The Central Shift Office completed two DST to DST waste transfers to support the

242-A Evaporator Campaign EC-09. The first transfer of waste from Tank AW-106 to Tank AW-102 filled tank

AW-102 with the feed waste for the campaign, and the second transfer from tank AP-104 to tank AW-106 provided

room within tank AP-104 to receive the slurry from the Evaporator during the campaign. In addition, a tank waste recirculation in tank AZ-102 was performed to support tank waste characterization and integrity of the tank.

222-S Laboratory: Completed installation of the Thermal Desorption Unit; the first of five analytical equipment replacements (procurement/installation) this year. The remaining four have been received on site and are in the package planning phase to prepare for installation during the next few months.


Evaporator Team: Crews completed AW Farm primary ventilation A-train and B-train flow checks for limiting

condition for operation, LCO 3.4. Repairs were completed for the AW farm B-train human-machine interface failure.

Function testing of 242-A Evaporator area radiation monitor and lube oil change of 242-A Evaporator raw water

strainers was completed.

Engineering

Tank Farms Monitoring and Control System (TFMCS): Process and Control System (P&CS) engineering provided

after hours support to recover AW Farm TFMCS controllers. Weekend support was also provided to troubleshoot

AW02A-LD-192, AW02D-LD-197 and AWB-LD-208, which were recovered and placed in service to support planned

evaporator variable frequency drive testing.

P&CS Engineering maintained cyber security by completing routine update of Anti-Virus definition and Operating

System Security patches on the TFMCS.

Effluent Treatment Facility: P&CS engineering completed configuration of Cisco® Firewall to support

communication between the ETF Monitor and Control System and the OSISoft® PI System.

Cyber Security: Developed appropriate software change documentation to implement a firmware update that will

resolve a high-level alert issued by the US Computer Emergency Response Team (US-CERT). This alert relates to a

vulnerability in the Cisco Adaptive Security Appliance (Firewall) located between the Industrial Control System and

HLAN networks. The update will be combined with several other US-CERT identified updates and be deployed after

the upcoming 242-A Evaporator campaign.

Closure and Interim Measures

Waste Management Area (WMA) C Closure:

The draft WMA, Waste Incidental to Reprocessing (WIR) evaluation was released for public and Nuclear

Regulatory Commission review on June 4, 2018. The WIR and Performance Assessment public meeting was held

on June 18, 2018. The WIR Evaluation demonstrates that the tanks, ancillary structures, and remaining residuals at

closure of WMA C will meet the WIR criteria in DOE Manual 435.1-1, and are not high-level radioactive waste

and may be disposed of in place as low-level radioactive waste. Development, review, and approval of the WIR

Evaluation are key steps in closure of WMA C.

On June 11, 2018, Ecology approved two WMA C key closure documents, the Phase 2 Resource Conservation and

Recovery Act (RCRA) Facility Investigation (RFI) and Corrective Measures Study (CMS) reports. This is the

culmination of approximately 10 years of collaborative efforts among DOE, WRPS, and Ecology staff.

Development and approval of the RFI and CMS are key steps in the closure of WMA C.

Field work was initiated at the first direct push location, C9385. A depth of 124 feet below ground surface was

achieved.

WMA A-AX: The direct push drill rig was moved into the 241-A Tank Farm on June 7, 2018. This marks the start of

characterization field activities around 241-A-105 and 241-A-104. Data from these characterization activities will be

used to plan retrieval and closure actions for WMA A-AX. The WMA A-AX sampling and analysis plan has been

cleared and released, and is ready for transmittal to Ecology.

Integrated Disposal Facility Performance Assessment: Completed the review of CH2M HILL Plateau Remediation

Company Integrated Disposal Facility Engineering Evaluation Report to support the RCRA of 1976 groundwater

monitoring plan for the Revision 9 Hanford permit application.

Mission Integration and Chief Technology Office

WRPS is designing and constructing the transfer system that will transfer treated LAW to the Waste Treatment and

Immobilization Plant from AP Tank Farm. Working through the WRPS Mission Integration and Bechtel One System

organizations, construction groups from WRPS and the Waste Treatment Completion Company agreed to a transfer

route that reduces environmental and worker health and safety risks by avoiding contaminated land. In addition, the

transfer route reduces project costs.

On May 31, 2018, the Immobilized Low-Activity Waste Transporter system receipt inspection reports and other PBI-

39.0.2 documentation were submitted to ORP, constituting successful completion of the PBI one month ahead of the

scheduled terminal due date. Planning for the testing of the transporter system has begun.

ACTUAL ACTUAL

COST COST

WORK WORK WORK WORK WORK WORK COST SCHEDULE BUDGETED ESTIMATED VARIANCE

SCHEDULED PERFORMED PERFORMED SCHEDULE COST SCHEDULED PERFORMED PERFORMED SCHEDULE COST VARIANCE VARIANCE BUDGET

(2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12a) (12b) (13) (14) (15) (16)

REPROGRAMMING ADJUSTMENTS

CURRENT PERIOD CUMULATIVE TO DATE

AT COMPLETIONBUDGETED

VARIANCE

ITEM

(1)

BUDGETED

COST VARIANCE COST

5.04 - Supplemental Treatment 20,110 20,110 19,161 949 20,110 19,161 949

5.04.01 - Supplemental Treatment 20,110 20,110 19,161 949 20,110 19,161 949

5.05 - Treat Waste 2,825 2,722 2,252 -103 470 133,269 132,264 140,306 -1,005 -8,042 142,728 151,573 -8,845

5.05.01 - LAWPS Conceptual Design 9,740 9,740 9,679 62 9,740 9,679 62

5.05.03 - LAWPS Management & Support 4,499 4,499 4,981 -482 4,499 4,981 -482

5.05.04 - LAWPS Project Support -2 2 13,096 13,096 15,433 -2,337 13,096 15,433 -2,337

5.05.05 - LAWPS Permitting 1,309 1,309 947 362 1,309 947 362

5.05.06 - LAWPS Safety Analysis 1,769 1,769 1,924 -155 1,769 1,924 -155

5.05.07 - LAWPS Technology Maturation 7 -7 28,615 28,615 27,482 1,133 28,615 27,482 1,133

5.05.08 - LAWPS Design 17 -17 56,111 56,111 62,845 -6,734 56,111 62,845 -6,734

5.05.11 - LAWPS Long Lead Procurements 6,346 6,346 6,207 139 6,346 6,590 -244

5.05.20 - LAWPS Project Management & Support 256 256 306 -50 256 306 -50

5.05.21 - LAWPS Project Support (PS) -2 2 660 660 766 -106 660 766 -106

5.05.22 - LAWPS Permitting 69 69 68 1 69 68 1

5.05.23 - LAWPS Safety Analysis (SA) 92 92 156 -64 92 156 -64

5.05.24 - LAWPS Technology Maturation 71 71 45 26 71 45 26

5.05.25 - LAWPS Design 2,331 2,331 2,700 -369 2,331 2,700 -369

5.05.31 - LAWPS South (LAWPS-S) Project Mgmt & Support 57 57 46 10 246 246 231 14 439 420 19

5.05.32 - LAWPS South (LAWPS-S) Project Support (PS) 878 488 549 -390 -61 1,791 1,265 1,407 -526 -143 3,412 3,844 -433

5.05.33 - LAWPS South (LAWPS-S) Permitting 25 25 20 5 89 89 82 7 174 165 8

5.05.34 - LAWPS South (LAWPS-S) Safety Analysis (SA) 24 24 57 -34 96 96 174 -79 177 255 -78

5.05.35 - LAWPS South (LAWPS-S) Technology Maturation 69 221 137 152 85 449 456 300 7 155 1,354 1,348 6

5.05.36 - LAWPS South (LAWPS-S) Design 1,773 1,907 1,422 134 485 5,636 5,151 4,572 -485 578 11,702 11,123 579

5.05.40 - LAWPS - Cesium Removal Capability 508 496 12

267,459 267,459

54,434 55,829 54,538 1,395 1,292 4,586,536 4,546,119 4,526,521 -40,417 19,598 5,032,833 5,022,364 10,469

6,583

54,434 55,829 54,538 1,395 1,292 4,586,536 4,546,119 4,526,521 -40,417 19,598 5,039,416

UPDATE FROM DD FORM 2734/1, MAR 05, PENDING APPROVAL LOCAL REPRODUCTION AUTHORIZED.

g. TOTAL

9. RECONCILIATION TO CONTRACT BUDGET BASE

b. TOTAL CONTRACT VARIANCE

Unclassified

CLASSIFICATION (When Filled In)

a. VARIANCE ADJUSTMENT

b. COST OF MONEY

c. GENERAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE

d. UNDISTRIBUTED BUDGET

e. SUB TOTAL (Performance Measurement Baseline)

f. MANAGEMENT RESERVE

Dollars IN Thousands

YES (YYYYMMDD)

ACTUAL ACTUAL

COST COST


SCHEDULED PERFORMED PERFORMED SCHEDULE COST SCHEDULED PERFORMED PERFORMED SCHEDULE COST VARIANCEVARIANCE BUDGET

(2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12a) (12b) (13) (14) (15) (16)

20 - Project Manager Office 6,485 6,485 6,485 6,485 6,485

200 - Project Manager Office 6,485 6,485 6,485 6,485 6,485

2A - Workforce Resources 14,282 14,282 14,282 14,282 14,282

2A0 - Workforce Resources 14,282 14,282 14,282 14,282 14,282

2B - ESH&Q 3,179 3,395 2,946 215 448 215,601 215,058 212,685 -543 2,372 226,888 225,123 1,765

2BA - Environmental Programs 514 514 456 59 44,348 44,348 40,955 3,394 46,107 42,815 3,292

2BB - Safety and Health 1,205 1,205 961 245 77,357 77,357 78,885 -1,528 81,803 83,679 -1,877

2BC - Security & Emergency Serv. 291 291 294 -3 25,399 25,399 25,740 -341 26,395 26,773 -378

2BD - Radiological Control 19,541 19,541 19,460 82 19,541 19,460 82

2BE - Quality Assurance 498 498 469 30 36,798 36,798 36,900 -101 38,502 38,534 -32

2BM - Chemical Protection Integratn 671 886 768 215 118 12,156 11,613 10,746 -543 867 14,540 13,862 678

2C - Project Integration 1,451 1,451 1,334 117 97,388 97,388 92,866 4,522 102,229 97,831 4,398

2CD - Interface Management 298 298 227 70 23,815 23,815 21,905 1,910 24,843 22,897 1,946

2CG - Contracts 6,931 6,931 6,931 6,931 6,931

2CH - EVMS Compliance & Reporting 188 188 209 -21 7,185 7,185 6,680 505 7,821 7,423 397

2CT - Chem Protection Program Office 278 278 325 -48 7,217 7,217 7,361 -144 8,167 8,592 -425

2CU - Project Controls 688 688 572 116 52,240 52,240 49,989 2,251 54,467 51,988 2,479

2D - Business Operations 63,013 63,013 63,013 63,013 63,013

2DB - Procurement Services 11,179 11,179 11,179 11,179 11,179

2DD - Information Resources 30,020 30,020 30,020 30,020 30,020

2DE - Finance 21,814 21,814 21,814 21,814 21,814

2F - SST Retrieval 9,129 8,968 6,904 -161 2,064 891,504 885,213 917,004 -6,292 -31,791 917,587 958,130 -40,544

2F0 - SST Retrieval & Closure 1,187 1,187 1,163 24 1,187 1,163 24

2FC - C Farm Retrieval & Closure -4 4 3,338 3,338 3,326 12 3,338 3,326 12

2FH - A and AX Farm Retrieval 6,950 6,958 6,231 8 727 249,174 243,842 277,291 -5,332 -33,450 269,411 311,925 -42,514

2FJ - AY-102 Recovery 370 211 -110 -159 321 109,642 108,941 101,651 -700 7,290 110,133 102,822 7,311

2FK - C Farm Retrieval 1,809 1,799 786 -11 1,012 528,164 527,905 533,572 -259 -5,668 533,517 538,894 -5,377

2H - External Affairs 2,825 2,825 2,825 2,825 2,825

2H0 - External Affairs 2,825 2,825 2,825 2,825 2,825

2J - Gen Counsel 3,423 3,423 3,415 8 3,423 3,415 8

2J0 - Gen Counsel 3,423 3,423 3,415 8 3,423 3,415 8

2K - Engineering 3,460 3,652 2,927 192 725 297,944 297,735 280,268 -210 17,467 309,920 291,747 18,174

2K0 - Engineering 1,503 1,503 1,503 1,503 1,503

2KL - Process Eng. Analysis 2,138 2,138 1,728 410 210,468 210,468 193,805 16,663 217,853 200,152 17,702

2KM - Prod Ops Engineering 514 514 506 9 34,862 34,862 35,010 -149 36,639 36,678 -39

2KT - Process Control Sys Eng. 808 1,000 693 192 306 51,112 50,902 49,949 -210 953 53,925 53,413 511


INTEGRATED PROGRAM MANAGEMENT REPORT PENDING UPDATE TO

FORMAT 2 - ORGANIZATIONAL CATEGORIES OMB No. 0704-0188The public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 0.6 hours per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this

burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing the burden, to Department of Defense, Washington Headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and Reports (0704-0188), 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington, VA 22202-4302. Respondents

should be aware that notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information if it does not display a currently valid OMB control number. PLEASE DO NOT RETURN YOUR FORM TO THIS ADDRESS. SUBMIT COMPLETED FORMS IN ACCORDANCE

WITH CONTRACTUAL REQUIREMENTS.

1. CONTRACTOR 2. CONTRACT 3. PROGRAM 4. REPORT PERIOD

a. NAME a. NAME a. NAME a. FROM (YYYYMMDD)

Washington River Protection Solutions (WRPS) Tank_Operations RV14800 20180528

b. LOCATION (Address and ZIP Code) b. NUMBER b. PHASE

PO Box 850 DE-AC27-08RV14800 PROD b. TO (YYYYMMDD)

Richland, WA 99352 c. TYPE d. SHARE RATIO c. EVMS ACCEPTANCE 20180624

CPAF 20090917


VARIANCE

REPROGRAMMING ADJUSTMENTS AT COMPLETIONBUDGETED BUDGETED

Unclassified

ITEM

(1)

COST VARIANCE COST

5. PERFORMANCE DATA

ACTUAL ACTUAL

COST COST


SCHEDULED PERFORMED PERFORMED SCHEDULE COST SCHEDULED PERFORMED PERFORMED SCHEDULE COST VARIANCEVARIANCE BUDGET

(2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12a) (12b) (13) (14) (15) (16)


VARIANCE

REPROGRAMMING ADJUSTMENTS AT COMPLETIONBUDGETED BUDGETED

ITEM

(1)

COST VARIANCE COST

2L - Production Operations 13,944 14,696 14,818 752 -121 1,210,967 1,206,665 1,198,073 -4,302 8,592 1,254,038 1,247,189 6,849

2L0 - Production Operations 381 381 388 -7 202,074 202,074 201,272 802 203,390 202,686 704

2LD - Prod Ops Tech Support 1,272 1,272 1,770 -498 108,317 108,317 101,705 6,612 112,674 105,850 6,824

2LH - 222-S Laboratory 3,269 3,857 3,830 587 26 297,655 296,418 287,122 -1,237 9,297 307,623 299,645 7,979

2LP - Shift Production Operations 1,276 1,562 1,243 286 319 71,238 71,214 73,179 -23 -1,965 75,593 78,180 -2,587

2LQ - Production Control 194 170 165 -24 5 3,477 3,518 2,949 40 568 3,994 3,402 592

2LR - Central Ops & Maint Services 1,202 1,202 1,357 -155 97,571 97,571 112,661 -15,091 101,734 117,326 -15,592

2LT - AN/AP/B/BX/BY/C Farm Team 1,012 1,012 1,124 -111 88,417 88,417 81,968 6,449 91,915 85,709 6,207

2LW - A/AX/AY/AZ Farm Team 935 935 906 30 72,114 72,114 70,028 2,086 75,347 73,261 2,086

2LX - AW/242-A/ETF Farm Team 3,388 3,359 3,065 -29 294 191,278 188,564 192,932 -2,714 -4,368 199,806 203,227 -3,422

2LY - T/TX/TY/SX/SY/S/U Farm Team 1,014 946 970 -68 -24 78,826 78,458 74,256 -368 4,202 81,962 77,903 4,059

2M - Tank Farm Projects 11,527 10,070 13,134 -1,457 -3,064 588,150 564,825 578,927 -23,325 -14,102 626,694 637,897 -11,203

2MH - TFP Proj Management 11,287 9,830 12,998 -1,457 -3,168 545,724 522,399 538,592 -23,325 -16,193 583,131 596,705 -13,574

2MJ - Const. & Commissioning 240 240 136 104 42,426 42,426 40,335 2,091 43,563 41,192 2,371

2P - Mission Integration Operations 1,222 939 1,573 -284 -635 210,723 210,523 187,959 -201 22,563 217,928 194,396 23,532

2PH - Flowsheet Integration 432 447 302 15 145 31,346 31,272 29,680 -73 1,592 32,839 31,202 1,637

2PJ - Mission Analysis & System Plng 542 415 347 -127 67 39,928 39,663 36,159 -265 3,504 41,503 37,451 4,051

2PK - Program Integration 248 77 924 -171 -846 139,450 139,587 122,121 138 17,467 143,586 125,743 17,843

2Q - Organization Perf Improvement 1,860 1,868 1,880 8 -12 139,201 139,028 141,775 -173 -2,747 145,584 148,343 -2,759

2Q1 - TOC Training 1,028 1,028 1,010 18 77,453 77,453 82,486 -5,033 81,005 85,919 -4,914

2Q2 - Core Procedures 357 357 298 59 26,629 26,629 24,897 1,732 27,864 25,979 1,885

2Q4 - Contractor Assurance 287 295 341 8 -46 25,358 25,185 24,198 -173 987 26,305 25,339 966

2Q6 - Human Performance Improvement 188 188 231 -43 9,761 9,761 10,194 -433 10,410 11,105 -695

2R - Waste Feed Delivery (Project) 3,108 3,004 2,414 -103 590 176,451 175,446 182,077 -1,005 -6,631 186,979 194,212 -7,233

2RA - Direct Feed LAWPS 2,825 2,722 2,252 -103 470 133,269 132,264 140,306 -1,005 -8,042 142,728 151,573 -8,845

2RB - Project Management Office 282 282 162 120 43,182 43,182 41,771 1,411 44,251 42,639 1,612

2T - Chief Technology Office/Closure 2,580 4,627 3,683 2,046 943 228,383 222,691 207,332 -5,692 15,358 238,336 224,356 13,980

2T0 - SST Closure & Interim Measures 348 287 464 -60 -177 25,888 25,448 25,702 -439 -254 26,943 27,949 -1,007

2TA - Closure & Interim Measures 826 2,349 1,176 1,523 1,173 93,780 90,725 87,003 -3,055 3,722 97,882 93,507 4,375

2TC - Chief Technology Office 1,224 1,772 1,837 549 -65 107,148 105,023 93,532 -2,125 11,491 110,274 100,029 10,245

2TD - TSCR Removal Project 183 217 206 35 11 1,567 1,495 1,095 -73 400 3,237 2,870 367

2U - Maintenance 2,974 3,160 2,924 186 236 134,284 135,609 131,653 1,325 3,956 143,253 139,781 3,473

2UA - Work Control 184 214 142 30 72 15,845 15,803 14,778 -42 1,024 16,480 15,242 1,238

2UB - WRPS Craft Support 253 253 287 -34 7,307 7,307 8,224 -917 8,182 9,151 -969

2UC - Maintenance Programs 2,537 2,693 2,495 156 197 111,133 112,500 108,651 1,367 3,849 118,592 115,388 3,204

2Y - Labor Relations 1,403 1,403 1,403 1,403 1,403

2Y0 - Labor Relations 1,403 1,403 1,403 1,403 1,403

2Z - Archive & Outyear Scope 304,510 304,510 304,480 30 304,510 304,480 30

2ZA - ARRA Project 304,510 304,510 304,480 30 304,510 304,480 30

267,459 267,459

54,434 55,829 54,538 1,395 1,292 4,586,536 4,546,119 4,526,521 -40,417 19,598 5,032,833 5,022,364 10,469

6,583

54,434 55,829 54,538 1,395 1,292 4,586,536 4,546,119 4,526,521 -40,417 19,598 5,039,416



e. SUB TOTAL (Performance Measurement

f. MANAGEMENT RESERVE

g. TOTAL

Unclassified

b. COST OF MONEY

c. GENERAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE

d. UNDISTRIBUTED BUDGET


INTEGRATED PROGRAM MANAGEMENT REPORT

FORMAT 3 - BASELINE Dollars IN Thousands

YES (YYYYMMDD)

CONTRACT CHANGES (a. + b.) AUTHORIZED UNPRICED WORK BASE (c. + d.) (e. - f.)

BCWS BCWS UNDIS-

CUMULA- FOR TRIBUTED

TIVE TO REPORT +1 +2 +3 +4 +5 +6 +7 +8 +9 +10 BUDGET

DATE PERIOD JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR TC

(2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12) (13) (14) (15)

4,532,102 55,365 53,246 68,200 54,342 284,885 5,048,141

b. BASELINE CHANGES AUTHORIZED DURING REPORT PERIOD

RPP-18-141 - DEFINITIZATION OF MOD 484 PSSD FOR ILAW CONTAINER (CP-17-006) -936 -15 -21 -8 -263 -1,243

RPP-18-145 - AX ELECTRICAL BACKBONE CONTAMINATED SOIL REMEDIATION 198 81 279

RPP-18-146 - ACES SENTINEL UPGRADE FIELD INSTALL -39 39 0 0

RPP-18-147 - ACCESS/EGRESS ROADWAY FROM 7TH STREET TO CRAFT TRAILERS 53 255 308

RPP-18-148 - LAWPS-S TECH. MAT. AND FY18 WTL DESIGN 5 333 468 590 -1,394

RPP-18-150 - TSCR 30% DESIGN MILESTONE & IX COLUMN 104 583 36 -722 0

RPP-18-151 - 2,000 GALLONS TBI - SAMPLING & INSTALLATION WORK PACKAGE 202 194 105 500

RPP-18-152 - Definitization of Mod 487 Comprehensive Vapors Action Plan Key Performance Parameters Implementation Scope of Work (CP-17-009) -15,152 -15,152

4,586,536 54,434 54,066 69,518 55,253 267,459 5,032,833

6,583

5,039,416


c. PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT BASELINE (End of Period)

7. MANAGEMENT RESERVE

8. TOTAL

Unclassified


PENDING UPDATE TO

OMB No. 0704-0188The public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 6.3 hours per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or

any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing the burden, to Department of Defense, Washington Headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and Reports (0704-0188), 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington, VA 22202-4302. Respondents should be aware that

notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information if it does not display a currently valid OMB control number. PLEASE DO NOT RETURN YOUR FORM TO THIS ADDRESS. SUBMIT COMPLETED FORMS IN ACCORDANCE WITH CONTRACTUAL REQUIREMENTS.







CPAF 20090917

5. CONTRACT DATA

a. ORIGINAL NEGOTIATED COST b. NEGOTIATED c. CURRENT NEGOTIATED COST d. ESTIMATED COST OF e. CONTRACT BUDGET f. TOTAL ALLOCATED BUDGET g. DIFFERENCE

3,764,253 1,193,291 4,957,544 81,872 5,039,416

h. CONTRACT START DATE i. CONTRACT DEFINITIZATION DATE j. PLANNED COMPLETION DATE k. CONTRACT COMPLETION DATE l. ESTIMATED COMPLETION DATE

ENTER SPECIFIED PERIODS TOTAL

(YYYYMMDD) (YYYYMMDD)

5,039,416

Unclassified

(1) (16)

a. PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT BASELINE (Beginning of Period)

20080930 20080529 20180930 20180930 20191009

(YYYYMMDD) (YYYYMMDD) (YYYYMMDD)

6. PERFORMANCE DATA

BUDGETED COST FOR WORK SCHEDULED (BCWS) (Non-Cumulative)

ITEM SIX MONTH FORECAST

YES (YYYYMMDD)

ACTUAL ACTUAL END OF

CURRENT CURRENT PERIOD +1 +2 +3 +4 +5 +6 +7 +8 +9 +10 +15

PERIOD (Cumulative) JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR TC

(2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12) (13) (14)

20 - President & Project Manager 23,238 23,238

200 - Project Manager Office 23,238 23,238

2A - Workforce Resources 87,905 87,905

2A0 - Workforce Resources 87,905 87,905

2B - ESH&Q 20,838 1,563,379 21,765 29,263 28,406 1,642,813

2BA - Environmental Programs 4,087 357,755 4,444 6,015 6,039 374,254

2BB - Safety and Health 7,026 531,420 7,347 10,410 9,971 559,148

2BC - Security & Emergency Serv. 2,315 226,955 2,236 3,128 3,079 235,398

2BD - Radiological Control 139,516 139,516

2BE - Quality Assurance 3,434 269,172 3,579 5,048 4,818 282,617

2BM - Chemical Protection Integratn 3,977 38,560 4,160 4,662 4,499 51,880

2C - Project Integration 8,896 685,210 8,668 11,872 11,266 717,016

2CD - Interface Management 2,071 150,030 2,004 2,773 2,422 157,229

2CG - Contracts 61,451 61,451

2CH - EVMS Compliance & Reporting 1,129 36,946 1,042 1,560 1,334 40,882

2CT - Chem Protection Program Office 1,116 21,458 1,149 1,490 1,415 25,512

2CU - Project Controls 4,581 415,326 4,473 6,049 6,095 431,943

2D - Business Operations 325,510 325,510

2DB - Procurement Services 172,502 172,502

2DD - Information Resources 51,023 51,023

2DE - Finance 101,985 101,985

2F - SST Retrieval 49,811 5,440,131 52,860 68,403 57,460 2,484 2,574 4,140 2,170 50 2,026 1,140 5,633,437

2F0 - SST Retrieval & Closure 5,638 5,638

2FC - C Farm Retrieval & Closure 19,280 19,280

2FH - A and AX Farm Retrieval 33,679 1,361,879 35,436 46,963 39,930 2,454 2,564 4,140 2,170 50 2,026 1,140 1,498,751

2FJ - AY-102 Recovery 851 465,521 2,254 3,058 3,908 474,741

2FK - C Farm Retrieval 15,281 3,587,812 15,170 18,382 13,622 30 10 3,635,027

2H - External Affairs 33,109 33,109

2H0 - External Affairs 33,109 33,109

2J - Gen Counsel 22,442 22,442

2J0 - Gen Counsel 22,442 22,442

2K - Engineering 23,339 1,903,595 23,546 32,605 29,738 1,989,484

2K0 - Engineering 16,316 16,316

2KL - Process Eng. Analysis 13,353 1,296,412 13,488 18,497 16,627 1,345,024

2KM - Prod Ops Engineering 4,529 271,487 4,311 5,212 4,505 285,516

2KT - Process Control Sys Eng. 5,457 319,380 5,748 8,896 8,605 342,629

PENDING UPDATE TO

FORMAT 4 - STAFFING (EAC HOURS) OMB No. 0704-0188The public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 5 hours per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send

comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing the burden, to Department of Defense, Washington Headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and Reports (0704-0188), 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway,

Suite 1204, Arlington, VA 22202-4302. Respondents should be aware that notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information if it does not display a currently valid OMB control number. PLEASE DO NOT RETURN

YOUR FORM TO THIS ADDRESS. SUBMIT COMPLETED FORMS IN ACCORDANCE WITH CONTRACTUAL REQUIREMENTS.







CATEGORY COMPLETION

(1) (15)

Unclassified

INTEGRATED PROGRAM MANAGEMENT REPORTCLASSIFICATION (When Filled In)

5. PERFORMANCE DATA (All figures in whole numbers)

FORECAST (Non-Cumulative)

ORGANIZATIONAL SIX MONTH FORECAST BY MONTH (Enter Names of Months) ENTER SPECIFIED PERIODS AT

CPAF 20090917

ACTUAL ACTUAL END OF

CURRENT CURRENT PERIOD +1 +2 +3 +4 +5 +6 +7 +8 +9 +10 +15

PERIOD (Cumulative) JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR TC

(2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12) (13) (14)

CATEGORY COMPLETION

(1) (15)

FORECAST (Non-Cumulative)

ORGANIZATIONAL SIX MONTH FORECAST BY MONTH (Enter Names of Months) ENTER SPECIFIED PERIODS AT

2L - Production Operations 125,360 11,855,648 128,939 163,575 151,691 564 4,412 180 12,305,008

2L0 - Production Operations 3,339 2,480,350 3,499 4,469 4,267 2,492,585

2LD - Prod Ops Tech Support 10,100 742,732 9,082 11,714 10,757 774,285

2LH - 222-S Laboratory 26,940 2,621,692 28,173 35,025 30,483 213 110 2,715,696

2LP - Shift Production Operations 13,532 823,482 14,059 18,112 17,265 351 4,302 180 877,750

2LQ - Production Control 1,152 21,218 1,096 1,416 1,352 25,082

2LR - Central Ops & Maint Services 10,312 875,107 10,630 12,917 12,758 911,412

2LT - AN/AP/B/BX/BY/C Farm Team 11,939 881,114 11,636 14,931 14,196 921,877

2LW - A/AX/AY/AZ Farm Team 8,980 738,938 9,666 13,095 12,351 774,049

2LX - AW/242-A/ETF Farm Team 28,613 1,888,189 30,309 36,487 35,170 1,990,155

2LY - T/TX/TY/SX/SY/S/U Farm Team 10,453 782,826 10,790 15,409 13,092 822,116

2M - Tank Farm Projects 47,804 3,230,005 44,373 68,050 54,462 7,792 5,705 4,694 1,753 909 387 319 5,006 3,423,454

2MH - TFP Proj Management 46,684 3,027,018 43,079 66,442 52,541 7,792 5,705 4,694 1,753 909 387 319 5,006 3,215,645

2MJ - Const. & Commissioning 1,121 202,987 1,293 1,608 1,921 207,810

2P - Mission Integration Operations 9,527 1,020,480 9,292 13,888 13,064 1,056,724

2PH - Flowsheet Integration 2,180 160,539 2,196 3,428 3,194 169,356

2PJ - Mission Analysis & System Plng 2,957 242,807 2,730 3,980 3,857 253,374

2PK - Program Integration 4,390 617,134 4,366 6,480 6,014 633,994

2Q - Organization Perf Improvement 11,264 930,777 11,415 14,301 14,083 970,575

2Q1 - TOC Training 3,661 348,285 3,576 4,457 4,661 360,980

2Q2 - Core Procedures 3,467 302,264 3,559 4,624 4,522 314,968

2Q4 - Contractor Assurance 2,515 215,678 2,515 3,051 2,865 224,109

2Q6 - Human Performance Improvement 1,622 64,550 1,765 2,169 2,035 70,518

2R - Waste Feed Delivery (Project) 4,610 465,397 4,414 6,221 5,566 481,597

2RA - Direct Feed LAWPS 3,160 210,946 2,790 4,088 3,614 221,437

2RB - Project Management Office 1,450 254,452 1,624 2,133 1,952 260,160

2T - Chief Technology Office/Closure 8,519 634,942 11,002 18,235 13,720 2,798 2,026 682,724

2T0 - SST Closure & Interim Measures 1,596 32,069 3,339 6,140 2,110 43,658

2TA - Closure & Interim Measures 3,994 396,896 3,747 6,876 6,824 2,798 2,026 419,167

2TC - Chief Technology Office 1,897 199,108 2,698 3,511 3,155 208,471

2TD - TSCR Removal Project 1,033 6,869 1,219 1,708 1,631 11,428

2U - Maintenance 10,608 704,716 10,868 13,317 12,398 741,299

2UA - Work Control 936 85,383 932 1,204 1,149 88,668

2UB - WRPS Craft Support 2,199 63,729 2,143 2,649 2,603 71,123

2UC - Maintenance Programs 7,473 555,604 7,793 9,464 8,646 581,508

2Y - Labor Relations 17,902 17,902

2Y0 - Labor Relations 17,902 17,902

2Z - Archive & Outyear Scope 1,347,443 1,347,443

2ZA - ARRA Project 1,347,443 1,347,443

320,576 30,291,829 327,140 439,726 391,853 13,639 14,717 9,014 3,923 959 2,413 1,459 5,006


6. TOTAL DIRECT 31,501,678


Unclassified

UNCLASSIFIED


Table of Contents

1.1 Integrated Program Management Report (IPMR) Project Summary Report............................................. 1 1.1.1 Performance Measurement Baseline (PMB): $5,032,833k ...................................................... 1 1.1.2 Estimate At Completion (EAC): $5,022,364k ......................................................................... 2 1.1.3 Variance At Completion (VAC): $10,469k ............................................................................. 2 1.1.4 Cumulative To Date (CTD) Schedule Variance (SV): -$40,417k ........................................... 2 1.1.5 Cumulative To Date (CTD) Cost Variance (CV): $19,598k .................................................... 2

1.2 Estimate At Completion Analysis ............................................................................................................. 2 1.2.1 Most Likely Case EAC (ML MEAC): $5,055,364k ................................................................ 2 1.2.2 Worst Case EAC: $5,070,168k ................................................................................................ 3 1.2.3 Best Case EAC: $5,040,560k ................................................................................................... 3

1.3 Undistributed Budget (UB) Analysis: $267,459k ..................................................................................... 3 1.4 Authorized Unpriced Work (AUW): $81,872k ......................................................................................... 4 1.5 Management Reserve (MR) Analysis: $6,583k ........................................................................................ 5 1.6 Schedule Analysis ..................................................................................................................................... 6

1.6.1 Critical and Driving Paths ........................................................................................................ 6 1.6.2 Baseline Schedule Variance ..................................................................................................... 7 1.6.3 Changes in Data Dictionary ..................................................................................................... 7 1.6.4 Schedule Health Analysis ........................................................................................................ 7

1.7 Format 2 Discussion (Organizational Breakdown Structure) .................................................................... 8 1.8 Format 3 Discussion (Baseline) ................................................................................................................ 8 1.9 Format 4 Discussion (Staffing) ................................................................................................................. 9 1.10 Reporting Level Cost and Schedule Variance Analysis .......................................................................... 9

1.10.1 Current Month (CM) Schedule Variance (SV): $1,395k ....................................................... 9 1.10.2 Cumulative-To-Date Schedule Variance: -$40,417k ........................................................... 10 1.10.3 Current Month Cost Variance: $1,292k ............................................................................... 14 1.10.4 Cumulative-To-Date Cost Variance: $19,598k .................................................................... 15 1.10.5 Variance at Completion: $17,052k ...................................................................................... 21

1.11 Supplemental Discussions ..................................................................................................................... 24 1.11.1 Early Change Notification ................................................................................................... 24 1.11.2 Program Risk Assessment .................................................................................................... 24 1.11.3 Inter-Entity Work Orders ..................................................................................................... 32 1.11.4 Comprehensive Vapor Action Plan (CVAP) ....................................................................... 32 1.11.5 Consent Decree .................................................................................................................... 33

UNCLASSIFIED


INTEGRATED PROGRAM MANAGEMENT REPORT

FORMAT 5 - EXPLANATIONS AND PROBLEM ANALYSES

PENDING UPDATE

TO

OMB No. 0704-0188


a. NAME a. NAME a. NAME a. FROM

Washington River Protection Solutions (WRPS) Tank Operations Contract RV14800 (YYYYMMDD)

b. LOCATION (Address and ZIP Code) b. NUMBER b. PHASE 20180528


Richland, WA, US 99352 c. TYPE CPAF d. SHARE RATIO c. EVMS ACCEPTANCE Yes - 20090917 20180624

1.1 Integrated Program Management Report (IPMR) Project Summary Report During this reporting period, Washington River Protection Solutions LLC (WRPS) Tank Operations Contract DE-AC27-08RV14800 (TOC) at the Hanford Site continued to work on the

performance measurement baseline (PMB) scope. The TOC Project Manager’s Assessment for this period is found preceding this report. Details of the current period program activities,

challenges, and accomplishments are communicated in the referenced assessment.

1.1.1 Performance Measurement Baseline (PMB): $5,032,833k

The PMB changed by -$15,309k in the current reporting period. The Distributed Budget (DB) change was $2,118k and Undistributed Budget (UB) change was -$17,427k. The overall

decrease was primarily due to Definitization of Mod 487, Comprehensive Vapor Action Plan Key (CVAP) Performance Parameters Implementation Scope of Work, resulted in a change

of -$105,221k in Authorized Unpriced Work (AUW) and $90,068 in Negotiated Contract Change (NCC); the difference of -$15,152 removed from UB and the baseline. New scope

added was 2,000 Gallons TBI – Sampling & Installation Work Package. MR utilization was related to AX Electrical Backbone Contaminated Soil Remediation and Access/Egress

Roadway from 7th Street to Craft Trailers. Two Change Proposals were definitized this month via Contract Modification 484 and 487. Specific Baseline Change Request (BCR) impacts

below in Table 1-1: Contract Budget Base, Performance Measurement Baseline, and Total Allocated Budget Impacts.

Table 1-1: Contract Budget Base, Performance Measurement Baseline, and Total Allocated Budget Impacts

UNCLASSIFIED


INTEGRATED PROGAM MANAGEMENT REPORT

FORMAT 5 - EXPLANATIONS AND PROBLEM ANALYSES Narrative Page 2 of 33

UNCLASSIFIED


1.1.2 Estimate At Completion (EAC): $5,022,364k

The EAC changed -$17,786k from last month. The EAC can be correlated to UB decreasing by -$17,427k and EACs associated with distributed budget changing by -$359k. Details of all

the UB impacts are seen in the previous section.

Additional MEAC details can be found in section 1.2 - Estimate at Completion Analysis.

1.1.3 Variance At Completion (VAC): $10,469k

The VAC changed from $7,992k to $10,469k, an impact of $2,477k. Further VAC details can be found in section 1.10.5 Variance at Completion.

1.1.4 Cumulative To Date (CTD) Schedule Variance (SV): -$40,417k

The CTD SV improved by the current period SV of $1,395k, bringing the CTD SV to -$40,417k. CTD schedule contributors that are unfavorable by more than -$1,500k includes:

5.01.05.11.56 Vapor Monitoring & Detection System Upgrades -$3,797k, 5.02.01.04.13 Interim SX Barrier South Construction -$3,531k, 5.02.08.04.04 A/AX Infrastructure Installation

-$3,275k, 5.01.04.01.64 DST Transfer Pump Replacements -$2,554k, and 5.01.02.06.08 ETF/LERF/TEDF Operations & Maintenance OP2 -$2,438k.

CTD SVs are discussed in further detail in section 1.10 - Reporting Level Cost and Schedule Variance Analysis.

1.1.5 Cumulative To Date (CTD) Cost Variance (CV): $19,598k

The CTD CV improved by the current period CV of $1,292k, bringing the program CTD CV total to $19,598k.

This period a cost correction, of -$1,512k, was processed. This was a result of an internal audit completed against a time and material construction subcontractor in regards to its FY09-17

indirect charges. The audit found that the vendor mistakably was charging the government for vehicles both directly and within their G&A rate. This credit corrects the error and the

vendor no longer charges direct for vehicles.

The largest favorable CTD CVs are 5.01.01.11.02 Production Operations Farms AN/AP/B/BX/BY/C $6,852k, 5.01.01.06.01 Waste Management Program $6,131k, 5.01.01.15.18

Standard Sluicer Removal & ERSS Installation $4,911k, 5.02.02.06.31 C-105 3rd Tech Operations $4,263k, and 5.01.01.12.01 Production Operations Farms S/SX/SY/T/TX/TY/U

$3,900k. In total, there are 64 control accounts with CTD CVs over $1,000k contributing to the favorable CV position.

The largest unfavorable CTD CVs are 5.02.08.03.04 AX-102/AX-104 Equipment Removal -$21,552k, 5.01.01.13.01 Production Ops Support Services -$11,807k, 5.02.02.06.05 C-105

Retrieval -$10,959k, 5.01.01.13.06 Production Operations Central Shift Office -$6,206k, 5.02.08.04.04 A/AX Infrastructure Installation -$5,255k. Beryllium, weather, vapors, tunnel

collapse, HAMTC Stop Work letter, and changing field conditions to-date have been primary contributors to the unfavorable cost.

The CTD CVs are discussed in further detail in section 1.10 Reporting Level Cost and Schedule Variance Analysis.

1.2 Estimate At Completion Analysis 1.2.1 Most Likely Case EAC (ML MEAC): $5,055,364k

This ML MEAC considers factors that have potential impacts on the program costs – both known and unknown risk assumptions. The calculation includes the CAMs PMB EAC,

Undistributed Budget, MR balance, and additional dollars from our risk calculation of probable impacts that are above the current MR balance. The CAM PMB EAC of $4,754,905k is

associated with the EAC forecast through Oct19. Undistributed budget of $267,459k is included in the final value. Of this UB, $34,700k is associated with AUW and $232,759k with

NCC. The Risk Department has a forecast-dollarized value that represents risks with a 65% or greater likelihood of happening, and using the 80% confidence level model output numbers

(that is the highest value for 80% of the trial runs). The calculation this period is $33,000k for all WRPS and Joint Risks. The entire risk forecast is included in the MEAC and is broken

UNCLASSIFIED




UNCLASSIFIED


out between MR of $6,583k and remaining risk, which is $26,417k, to reflect the entire risk value of $33,000k. The MEAC changed -$17,786k this month, entirely related to the EAC

decrease. Table 1-2 below details the components of this MEAC calculation.

1.2.2 Worst Case EAC: $5,070,168k The ETC forecast, AUW UB forecast, and MR/Risk are adjusted up by 5% to account for low estimates. Actuals-to-date and NCC UB will remain constant and are not adjusted higher in

this calculation.

1.2.3 Best Case EAC: $5,040,560k The ETC forecast, AUW UB forecast, and MR/Risk are adjusted down by 5% for high estimates. Actuals-to-date and NCC UB will remain constant and are not adjusted lower in this

calculation.

Table 1-2: Management Estimate At Completion Comparison

1.3 Undistributed Budget (UB) Analysis: $267,459k Last period UB was $284,885k, which represents a current period change of -$17,427k. The largest UB changes ware related to CP 17-009 CVAP Parameters Implementation

Negotiation Alignment (-$15,152k) and CP 18-007 LAWPS Design Proposal (-$1,394k). Additional UB changes can be seen in Table 1-3 below. UB related to AUW is $34,700k and is

not subject to aging, as the scope has not yet been definitized. UB that has been definitized, but not distributed, shows aging and a value of $232,759k. Details of both UB categories are

provided in Table 1-3: Undistributed Budget below.

Best Most Likely Worst

EAC Impacts

Actuals To Date $4,526,521 Actuals to Date - no adjustment

Program ETCs for July 2018 through Sept 2018 $196,889 $207,251 $217,614 Contract Period of Performance (PoP) ETCs

Program ETCs Oct 2018 - Oct 2019 based on SLCS $20,076 $21,133 $22,190 Outside PoP - No risk calc additions are associated with these costs

UB Impacts

Undistributed Budget associated with AUW $32,965 $34,700 $36,435

Undistributed Budget associated with NCC $232,759 $232,759 $232,759

MR Balance $6,254 $6,583 $6,912

Risk Calculation

Risk with greater than 65% occurrence expectation less MR balance

Best Most Likely Worst

$5,040,560 $5,055,364 $5,070,168

Management Estimate At Completion (MEAC)

WRPS risk exposure (after a model run with only WRPS and WRPS/ORP

owned risks) is forecasted at $33M at 80% confidence. The Risk calculation

is reduced by the existing MR balance of $6,583k.

Total New MEACs (in thousands)

$27,738$26,417$25,096

UNCLASSIFIED




UNCLASSIFIED


Table 1-3: Undistributed Budget

1.4 Authorized Unpriced Work (AUW): $81,872k AUW is $81,872k, a change of -$106,374k from last period. This period, two AUW CP’s were negotiated: CP 17-009 CVAP Key Performance Parameters Implementation and CP 17-

006 Package-Specific Safety Document for ILAW Container. CVAP AUW removed was $105,221k and ILAW AUW removed was $1,653. One AUW CP increased this period: CP 18-

014 Rad Waste Test Bed Initiative 2,000 gallons. The previous AUW amount on this scope was $1,000k. An additional $500k was added this period making the total AUW balance

NCC/AUW CP# Description Type Prior Balance CM Impact Balance Aging Justification

AUW 16-017 Tank Farm Upgrades to Support DFLAW Expense 10,515$ 0$ 10,515$ N/A Finalizing Negotiations

AUW 17-004 Fire Alarm Panel Upgrades (2704HV & 222-S Lab) Expense 1,891$ -$ 1,891$ N/A Currently Negotiating

AUW 17-006 Package-Specific Safety Document for ILAW Container Expense 263$ (263)$ -$ N/A Negotiated this period

AUW 17-022 222-SL Cold Laboratory (Procurement & Construction RFP) Expense 0.5$ -$ 0.5$ N/A Pending Definitization

AUW 18-001 Tech Demo of a Tank-side Cesium Removal Capability Expense 3,485$ (722)$ 2,763$ N/A Pending Definitization

AUW 18-004 DOE Order 205.1B Cyber Security Expense 0.3$ -$ 0.3$ N/A Pending Definitization

AUW 18-006 TSCR Balance of Plant Workscope Expense 797$ (0)$ 797$ N/A Pending Definitization

AUW 18-007 LAWPS Design Proposal Capital 19,168$ (1,394)$ 17,773$ N/A Pending Definitization

AUW 18-008 Contact Handled Transurantic Waste Demostration Planning Effort Expense 782$ -$ 782$ N/A On Stop Work by DOE-ORP CO

AUW 18-009 ACES to Sentinel Upgrade Expense 2$ (0)$ 2$ N/A Pending Definitization

AUW 18-012 SX Barrier Expansion Expense 1$ -$ 1$ N/A Pending Definitization

AUW 18-014 Rad Waste Test Bed Initative – 2,000 Gallons Expense 55$ 105$ 160$ N/A Pending Definitization

AUW 18-015 Analysis of Alternatives for the 222-S Cold Laboratory Expansion Expense 15$ -$ 15$ N/A Pending Definitization

36,974$ (2,274)$ 34,700$

NCC 14-013 Additional Single-Shell Tank Waste Retrievals (A/AX) and Addendum Expense 37,481$ -$ 37,481$ 455 Contract Direction Required

NCC 14-026 C-107 Third Technology Expense 7,133$ -$ 7,133$ 902 Contract Direction Required

NCC 15-005 DOE O 420.1C Facility Safety - Balance of TOC Expense 3,300$ -$ 3,300$ 672 Contract Direction Required

NCC 15-009 Phase 1 Chemical Vaports Plan Implementation Expense 4,631$ -$ 4,631$ 267 Contract Direction Required

NCC 15-012 Fall Protection Program Rev 1A Expense 1,238$ -$ 1,238$ 267 Contract Direction Required

NCC 15-028 242-A Evaporator DSA System Upgrades Expense 4,054$ -$ 4,054$ 267 Contract Direction Required

NCC 15-053 FY17-FY18 Scope Proposal Expense 107,062$ (0)$ 107,062$ 581 Contract Direction Required

NCC 17-009 Comprehensive Vapors Action Plan Key Perf Parameters Implementation Expense 20,134$ (15,152)$ 4,982$ - Negotiated this period

NCC 17-011 200-E-310 and 200-E-311 PL Transfer Lines Expense 1,322$ 0$ 1,322$ 63 Determining Baseline Implementation

NCC 17-016 Definitization of Contract Mod 479 PUREX Tunnel Event Expense 1,310$ -$ 1,310$ 63 Determining Baseline Implementation

NCC 17-019 SX Barrier Expansion Design Expense 80$ -$ 80$ 28 Within 60 Day Period

NCC 17-023 Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant Transition support Expense 2,376$ -$ 2,376$ 28 Within 60 Day Period

NCC General General UB Est w/FY16 deferrals. Coordinate use during FY17/18 Expense 57,790$ -$ 57,790$ N/A Contract Direction Required

247,911$ (15,152)$ 232,759$

Grand Total 284,885$ (17,427)$ 267,459$

Undistributed Budget (in Thousands)

TOTAL AUTHORIZED UNPRICED WORK

TOTAL NEGOTIATED CONTRACT COST

UNCLASSIFIED




UNCLASSIFIED


$1,500k. The current average age of the existing AUW scope is 247 days, which is an increase from the prior period average of 219. The longest AUW is 632 days for Tank Farm

Upgrades to Support DFLAW. Table 1-4 details all of these AUW scope balances, the percentage of AUW scope distributed to Control Accounts, and the aging of each scope.

Table 1-4: Authorized Unpriced Work

1.5 Management Reserve (MR) Analysis: $6,583k MR is $6,583k, a change of -$583k from last period.

Table 1-5: Management Reserve

CP # Previous CM AUW DB UB % Distrb Aging

Expense

16-017 Tank Farm Upgrades to Support DFLAW 18,819$ -$ 18,819$ 8,304$ 10,515$ 44.1% 632

16-020 AY-102 Phase 3 5,468$ -$ 5,468$ 5,468$ -$ 100.0% 490

17-004 Fire Alarm Panel Upgrades (2704HV & 222-S Lab) 2,347$ -$ 2,347$ 456$ 1,891$ 19.4% 336

17-006 Package-Specific Safety Document for ILAW Container 1,653$ (1,653)$ -$

17-009 CVAP Key Performance Parameters Implementation 105,221$ (105,221)$ -$

17-022 222-SL Cold Laboratory (Procurement & Construction RFP) 50$ -$ 50$ 49.5$ 0.5$ 99.0% 336

18-001 Tech Demo of Tank-Side Cesium Removal Capability 6,000$ -$ 6,000$ 3,237$ 2,763$ 53.9% 210

18-004 DOE Order 205.1B - Cyber Security 100$ -$ 100$ 100$ 0.3$ 99.7% 182

18-005 ETF Component Replacement 370$ -$ 370$ 370$ -$ 100.0% 126

18-006 TSCR Balance of Plant Workscope 5,000$ -$ 5,000$ 4,203$ 797$ 84.1% 210

18-008 Contact Handled Transurantic Waste Demonstration Planning Effort 1,000$ -$ 1,000$ 218$ 782$ 21.8% 182

18-009 ACES to Sentinel Upgrade 350$ -$ 350$ 348$ 2$ 99.4% 91

18-012 SX Barrier Expansion 750$ -$ 750$ 749$ 1$ 99.8% 28

18-013 Acceleration of ILAW Transporter Testing 351$ -$ 351$ 351$ -$ 100.0% 28

18-014 Rad Waste Test Bed Initative – 2,000 Gallons 1,000$ 500$ 1,500$ 1,340$ 160$ 89.3% 28

18-015 Analysis of Alternatives for the 222-S Cold Laboratory Expansion 170$ -$ 170$ 155$ 15$ 91.1% 28

Capital

18-007 LAWPS Design Proposal 39,597$ -$ 39,597$ 21,824$ 17,773$ 55.1% 210

Grand Total (in Thousands): 188,246$ (106,374)$ 81,872$ 47,172$ 34,700$ 57.6% 247

Expense Beginning MR Balance $7,018

RPP-18-141 Definitization of Mod 484 PSSD For ILAW Container (CP-17-006) $4

RPP-18-145 AX Electrical Backbone Contaminated Soil Remediation -$279

RPP-18-147 Access/Egress Roadway from 7th Street to Craft Trailers -$308

Total Expense MR $6,435

$148

MR Total: $6,583

Management Reserve (in Thousands)

Total Capital MR (no change)

UNCLASSIFIED




UNCLASSIFIED


1.6 Schedule Analysis

1.6.1 Critical and Driving Paths WRPS utilizes a “driving path” methodology to track near term commitments within the Fiscal Year (FY) Work Plan to assess progress with longer-term critical path deliverables. Often

times, these longer term commitments are beyond the contract period of performance. Performance Based Incentives (PBI’s) are often placed on these near term milestones in order to

convey the significance in accomplishment of the task to both WRPS and DOE-ORP. PBI-35.0.4 “Complete C-105 Retrieval Completion Certification report” is one such commitment.

Completion of waste retrieval from tank C-105 is a near term task that supports the longer-term Consent Decree milestones for completion of 5 tank retrievals by the year 2020 and

completion of 9 tank retrievals by the year 2024. PBI-35.0.4 shows 64 days of float to its required completion date of 9/30/18. The Certification Report and WRPS sub-certification for

PBI-35.0.4 were approved on 6/12/18 and submitted to ORP on 6/12/18.

C-105 retrieval completion was formally certified to Ecology on 6/28/18. This will officially complete the Consent Decree milestone for retrieval of C-Farm.

UNCLASSIFIED




UNCLASSIFIED


Driving Path - C-105 3rd Retrieval Completion

1.6.2 Baseline Schedule Variance The WRPS schedule as a whole has completed 99.6% of the expected work planned in the baseline through month end Jun18. 55 of the 216 activities completed this month were

completed ahead of schedule, with the average being 24 working days early. While some work activities have been completed ahead of schedule, the project as a whole is behind

schedule. To date there are 526 unfinished activities which were planned to be completed, which remains near the same number that was reported last month. The amount of behind

schedule activities is expected to decrease in the coming months. A third (34%) of the currently behind schedule activities are planned to be completed during fiscal Jul18. While 63% are

projected to complete prior to Aug18 month end. Only 12% of the behind schedule tasks are not planned to be completed this fiscal year.

1.6.3 Changes in Data Dictionary WRPS did not have any Data Dictionary revisions this reporting period, Jun18.

1.6.4 Schedule Health Analysis

The Jun18 IPMR includes schedule health metrics shown against the forecast schedule.

High float and high duration tasks continue to be areas of interest for WRPS. Due to the nature of the Tank Operations Contract and associated work scopes, high float is not expected to

be significantly corrected to the extent of achieving “green” within the DCMA 14 Point check however, efforts continue to be made to evaluate and improve metrics. High float activities

continue to be reviewed to ensure appropriate logic between tasks. In addition, on-going reviews of out of sequence logic within the expense funded operations activities have led to a

correction in high float values over the last several months. When logic is found to be sound but the float still exceeds metric threshold, justifications are placed within the schedule. Thus

Current

1.

Logi

c

2.

Lead

s

3.

Lags

4.

SS/F

F R

ela

tio

ns

4.

SF R

ela

tio

ns

5.

Har

d C

on

stra

int

6.

Hig

h F

loat

7.

Ne

gati

ve F

loat

8.

Hig

h D

ura

tio

n

9.

Inva

lid

Fo

reca

st D

ate

s

9.

Inva

lid

Act

ual

Dat

es

10

. R

eso

urc

es

11

. M

isse

d A

ctiv

itie

s

12

. C

riti

cal

Pat

h T

est

13

. C

PLI

14

. B

EI

October 2017 WRPS Forecast Schedule 0% 0% 5% 22% 0% 0% 54% 0% 19% 0% 0% 0% 27% X 0.72 0.86

November 2017 WRPS Forecast Schedule 0% 0% 4% 21% 0% 0% 50% 3% 18% 0% 0% 0% 33% X 0.61 0.93

December 2017 WRPS Forecast Schedule 0% 0% 4% 20% 0% 0% 39% 22% 19% 0% 0% 0% 37% X 0.71 0.85

January 2018 WRPS Forecast Schedule 0% 0% 4% 21% 0% 0% 36% 28% 19% 0% 0% 0% 41% X 0.65 0.80

February 2018 WRPS Forecast Schedule 0% 0% 5% 21% 0% 0% 61% 11% 19% 0% 0% 0% 43% ✓ 0.66 0.80

March 2018 WRPS Forecast Schedule 0% 0% 2% 29% 0% 0% 36% 10% 25% 0% 0% 0% 48% X 0.65 1.16

April 2018 WRPS Forecast Schedule 0% 0% 6% 30% 0% 0% 27% 11% 22% 0% 0% 0% 47% X 0.55 1.14

May 2018 WRPS Forecast Schedule 0% 0% 5% 29% 0% 0% 23% 15% 21% 0% 0% 0% 51% ✓ 0.52 1.09

June 2018 WRPS Forecast Schedule 0% 0% 5% 32% 0% 0% 19% 20% 22% 0% 0% 0% 55% ✓ 0.51 1.07

*SVTs have been excluded from resource metric.

WRPS FY2018 Forecast Schedule DCMA 14 Point Schedule Health Metrics

UNCLASSIFIED




UNCLASSIFIED


far, the reviews have found a few areas where corrections to logic or justifications were required, however most activities reviewed were found to have sound logic and proper

justification for the high float already documented within the P6 Notebook fields.

Lags (Green) – 5% (100 Activities) of the forecast schedule activities have lags. Lags are currently right at DCMA established threshold of 5%. Lags were reduced by 25

compared to last month. Majorities of the lags are found within the LAWPS project and are expected to decrease to below metric threshold as the schedule and design matures

between WRPS and the A/E subcontractor.

SS/FF Relationships (Red) – 32% (681 Activities). Start-to-start and finish-to-finish relationships decreased by 25 activities as compared to the prior reporting month. The

amount of SS and FF relationships is expected to decrease as expanded detail is added to the LAWPS schedule as the design matures with the A/E. The LAWPS project intends

to utilize more of a “Rolling Wave” planning process than it has previously, which created more SS and FF relationships on future work scope which will be corrected as that

scope is detail planned in the future.

High Float (Yellow) – 19% (247 activities) of our Forecast Schedule activities have high float. High Float is measured against the DCMA “14-Point” metric of not exceeding 44

days. This represents a decrease of 94 activities as compared to the prior month and a reduction of 255 over the last 3 months. The WRPS operations activities reduced the

amount of high float activities by 84 in the month of Jun18, which brought percentage of high float on the operations activities to 11%, which is the lowest percentage this fiscal

year. This reduction was primarily the result of reviews and corrections to logic, specifically the correction to logic on activities that are being performed out of sequence in

relation to the baseline plan. The total float is expected to increase in Jul18 however, due to the implementation of the FY19 plan into the IMS, which will add a year of duration

to the schedule and to the project end date, which in turn will increase the number of activities with float exceeding 44 days. Currently the average total float for all WRPS

expense funded projects is 7 days and average total float for the LAWPS project is 45 days.

Negative Float (Red) – 20% (258 activities). The amount of negative float increased by 39 activities as compared to the prior period. Of the 258 activities with negative float, 37

have their float derived from submittals of PBI milestones prior to the end of the fiscal year. The remainder derive their float from completion of scope (or follow-on scope) prior

to 9/30/18 in alignment with the Fiscal Year Work Plan or TOC Contract end date. 152 of the 258 activities are currently forecasted to complete prior to the end of the fiscal

year. The amount of negative float is expected to reduce in Jul18 with the implementation of the FY19 plan into the IMS, which will add a year of duration to the schedule and to

the project end date

High Duration (Yellow) – 22% (289 activities) of our Forecast Schedule activities have high duration. High duration activities have remained relatively static over the prior

few reporting periods, decreasing by 19 activities as compared to last month. The High Duration metric is based off the “original duration” or the planned duration of the activity

prior to its actual start. 1/3 of the high duration tasks have a remaining duration, the amount of time left until that tasks is planned to be completed, which is below the 44 day

metric. As such, the number of high duration activities should continue to decrease over time as work is completed. In addition, a majority of these high duration activities are

supporting tasks in nature. WRPS continues to evaluate the remainder of these activities to determine if a change to the earned value method to level of effort (LOE) or a similar

method is warranted to more clearly depict the supporting nature of these scopes, including providing comments and suggestions to industry best practice guides and working

with DOE policy makers through our EFCOG partnership. While the total number of activities with high duration exceeds the metric threshold, the average remaining duration

of tasks is below the 44-day threshold. For the LAWPS project, the average remaining duration of tasks is 36 days, and for the WRPS expense funded projects the average

remaining duration is 30 days.

1.7 Format 2 Discussion (Organizational Breakdown Structure) The IPMR Format 2 reflects the 10-year period (FYs 2009-2018) by organizational categories at Level 2 and 3. There were no changes in the OBS structure this period.

1.8 Format 3 Discussion (Baseline) A total of 8 BCRs were approved and implemented during the month: 6 - Level 3 BCRs (Change Board Approval and Internal WRPS approval), 1 - Level 2 BCR (Require ORP

concurrence), and 1 - Administrative BCR (Internal WRPS approval). Details of all BCRs are shown in Section 1.1.1 on Table 1-1. The estimated contract completion date changed from

UNCLASSIFIED




UNCLASSIFIED


July 5, 2019 to October 9, 2019. The cross-site transfer line encasements were reclassified in the Documented Safety Analysis (DSA) as Class 1 Div 1, the leak detection cables on the

cross-site transfer line were administratively locked out due to them not meeting this criterion. In order to verify the encasements are holding pressure we need to install new calibrated

pressure gauges on the encasements. In addition, we need to isolate the leak detection system to only turn on the supernate line. Currently the system powers both lines (Supernate and

Slurry) and 2 of the 3 sections of the slurry line are not holding a pressure. In addition, we need to demonstrate we have a design ready to reestablish nitrogen pressure should any of the

supernate sections pressure fall below the allowed levels. This “Nitrogen Pressure Addition Design” will include the manifold and potentially SS pressure relief valving required to

protect against the DSA accident scenario. This design is required to perform the DSA amendment. Currently the DSA specifically states that a DSA amendment is required prior to

adding nitrogen to the encasements. Once the nitrogen system design is complete, the DSA amendment will begin. During this time, the project will be replacing the pressure gauges and

isolating the leak detection cable to only energize the supernate line. After the DSA amendment is complete, we will be able to remove the administrative locks from the leak detection.

Originally assumed to be a simple safety basis amendment the now required DSA with associated design will delay the project significantly and forecast dates have been updated

accordingly. The project will continuously review forecast dates moving forward and adjust following further project definition.

1.9 Format 4 Discussion (Staffing) IPMR Format 4 staffing is reported in Forecast Hours. The project is forecasting 31,501,678 hours through the Oct19 completion, as compared to the 31,521,478 hours last period, a

change of -19,800 hours. The impacts of the change in forecasted hours are primarily within 2F SST Retrievals. Retrievals reduction in EAC hours was a result of reviewing the critical

craft against the scope of work to still be performed. Upon this review, it was determined an entire crew was being estimated instead of just the required resources. EAC adjustments were

made based on this review. Additionally, labor for FY19 scope was updated for realism and labor efficiency trends were incorporated.

A review of the Actual end of Current Period (Cumulative), {5.(3)} indicated that there was a difference between the hours reported in HANDI and Cobra/Empower (WRPS reporting

tool). Prior to the implementation of the new WRPS reporting tool, data for the Format 4 was reported in man-months, not hours. Imports into the old system, Cost Manager, and the AG

resources fed into Cost Manager did not always include hours in the data. Cost was always verified and CTD reconciled to HANDI costs. Since the implementation of Cobra, hours have

matched.

1.10 Reporting Level Cost and Schedule Variance Analysis The WBS level 3 (reporting level) analyses are derived from the CAM’s WBS Level 5 Control Account variances.

1.10.1 Current Month (CM) Schedule Variance (SV): $1,395k Level 3 VAR analysis remains focused on the largest contributors to the CM SVs.

5.02.01 – Retrieval/Closure Program $1,697k

Current Period –In Thousands

CM BCWS CM BCWP CM ACWP CM SV CM SPI CM CV CM CPI

$2,228k $3,925k $6,170k $1,697k 1.76 -$2,244k 0.64

The primary contributor is Vadose Zone Mgmt & Regulatory Docs $1,518k

Cause

UNCLASSIFIED




UNCLASSIFIED


The CM SV is due to receipt of Ecology's approval of the WMA C RCRA Facility Investigation (RFI) and Corrective Measures Study (CMS) reports, without comments. In letter 18-

NWP-088, dated June 11, 2018, Ecology approved these documents without requiring additional comments, or a comment resolution period. The Prepare Comment Responses activities

for both documents were statused as complete during the current reporting period. Completion dates were originally planned for Mar17.

Impact

Comment response activities that were planned, were statused complete, as a result of Ecology's approval of the WMA C RFI and CMS.

Corrective Action

No corrective action.

1.10.2 Cumulative-To-Date Schedule Variance: -$40,417k Level 3 VAR analysis remains focused on the largest contributors to the CTD SVs.

5.01.04 - Tank Farm Upgrades -$7,217k

Cumulative-to-Date (in thousands)

CTD BCWS CTD BCWP CTD ACWP CTD SV CTD SPI CTD CV CTD CPI

$304,824k $297,606k $305,201k -$7,217k 0.98 -$7,595k 0.98

Summary Performance Narrative:

This effort is behind schedule. This element’s BAC of $314,189k represents 6.2% of the total contract budget. 97% of the effort is scheduled to have been completed, while 94.7% has

been completed, and an amount equal to 97.1% of the budget has been spent. The SPI indicates that work equal to 97.6% of that planned has been accomplished. The minimum total

float of linked tasks is -206 days. The BEI indicates that a number of tasks equal to 95.4% of those baselined to finish have actually finished. The CEI indicates that 31.1% of the tasks

forecast last period to finish this period have actually finished.

The primary contributors are 1) DST Transfer Pump Replacements (FY17&18) -$2,554k, 2) DST In-Pit Heating -$1,102k, 3) 242-A Evaporator Fire Alarm Panel Upgrades -

$721k and 4) TF Automation Upgrades (FY17&18) -$693k

Causes (1) This project's CTD SV is due to WRPS reprioritization, because of a plugged pump risk event. The AZ-102 Pump and Jumper Replacement was in full swing and on-schedule when

AW-103 realized a risk (AW103-008-R) of a plugged pump. Work was then reprioritized to mobilize at AW-103 and perform pump-flushing activities. Once the plugged pump was

cleared work continued at AZ-102. In addition, mobilization and fieldwork activities associated with the AZ-102 pump replacement project were further delayed due to the location

change of a bottle facility. Retrofit of the tent at 217-AZ for bottle change out was completed in Mar18. High winds experienced during Mar18 initiation of pit preparation for removal

further delayed activities for AZ-102 Pump and Jumper Replacement. The project experienced recovery of schedule for the AZ-102 Pump and Jumper Replacement in May18.

Completion of installation occurred in Jun18. AW-103 Pump and Jumper Replacement is behind schedule due to the preceding events.

(2) The CTD SV for this discrete account is due to the following current activities: Current Month: Delays during installation of pit heaters. Installations have been delayed due to work

package preparation delays. The work packages required job hazard analysis (JHA) completed before the packages go out for approvals. The resources needed to complete the JHA were

working on higher priority work scope. In addition, there were delays to completion of the core drilling fieldwork. a) The construction support field labor is being scheduled to perform

higher priority work scope at least once a week. b) As-found conditions at each pit are causing different issues delaying completion. This results in interruption of task completion.

Previous: The need to re-spray ANA and ANB pits. When the core drilling fieldwork was completed on ANA and ANB pits, the method used, sprayed particle laden water into the pit

UNCLASSIFIED




UNCLASSIFIED


creating concrete dust upon drying. The project developed a method used to clean up these two pits as well as developed a new core drilling method which should decrease the

likelihood of another issue for the remaining pits.

(3) The CTD SV is due to the delay of installation, as a result of an issue with the original engineering change notice (ECN) needed for installation of the fire alarm panel. The

subcontractor has completed a new fire alarm system ECN and project design is complete. Fieldwork is slated to begin in July and complete in August 2018.

(4) The CTD SV is due to delays in the installation of AP farm electrical panels. Installation delayed in the month of Jun18, because of construction resources working on higher priority

work scope, which caused a pause in the completion of the electrical installation. Installation is projected to restart in fiscal month Aug18.

Impacts (1) The delays experienced in completion of the AZ-102 Pump and Jumper Replacement have a cascading effect on the next pump and jumper change out at AW-103.

(2) The current delay has not affected the PBI or any outside project. Projects affected if DST In-Pit Heating is not completed are as follows: TF Automation Part 2 due to the need for

the project to install the AN01A and AN06A temperature monitoring trees and update associated design media. In addition, projects requiring vapor controls could benefit from remote

monitoring by limiting the use of operators and redeploying these resources to other projects (projects such as DST transfers).

(3) Currently, no impact to any evaporator campaign and fieldwork will be executed within available facility windows.

(4) The fieldwork will be completed before the PBI due date of 9/30/2018.

Corrective Actions

(1) Full schedule recovery is anticipated in Aug18 as current projections are demonstrating plant forces availability to complete execution

(2) The project worked with the AE to incorporate the requirement to bury the conduit which connect from the MPZ to the heaters in the pit, recovery expected in Aug18

(3) Design and work package planning are complete and the constructor will commence work in fiscal month July and complete in August 2018.

(4) The project is working with management to work on plan to complete the installation by the end of August 2018.

5.01.05 – Project Support -$6,672k



$932,323k $925,651k $911,021k -$6,672k 0.99 $14,630k 1.02


This effort is behind schedule. This element’s BAC of $970,444k represents 19.3% of the total contract budget. 96.1% of the effort is scheduled to have been completed, while 95.4%

has been completed, and an amount equal to 93.9% of the budget has been spent. The SPI indicates that work equal to 99.3% of that planned has been accomplished. The minimum total



The primary contributors are 1) Vapor Monitoring and Detection System Upgrades -$3,797k, 2) Industrial Hygiene Trailer -$1,226k, and 3) Tank Farms PA System for

Event Notification -$709k

Causes

UNCLASSIFIED




UNCLASSIFIED


(1) The CTD SV is driven by 1) Delayed receipt of fence-line monitoring equipment. Upfront procurement process and contract award to vendor was delayed to allow further time to

finalize specifications and quality assurance (QA) requirements for the equipment. Progress payments are being made throughout procurement process. 2) Delayed receipt of stack

monitoring equipment. Upfront procurement process and contract award to vendor was delayed to allow further time to finalize specifications and QA requirements for the equipment.

3) Delays in turnover procedural development and final operational acceptance test (OAT) and Test Report development for AP Farm readiness. Critical engineering resource needs are

driving out the completion of the UV-FTIR functions and requirements document, which is needed prior to performing the final operations acceptance testing. 4) AW, 702-AZ, AN, and

AX farms' stack monitor work package planning and field installation delayed due to ongoing procurements. Procurements were ordered later than expected due to longer than

anticipated duration to determine final equipment specifications and functional requirements.

(2) The CTD SV is the result of initial delays in the decision on sizing of trailer (complete) and the DOE real property review delays in approval for procurement of the 10-wide trailer

(complete), which have subsequently caused delays to following activities comprising the project's CTD SV: 1) IH Trailer Installation, 2) IH Trailer receipt, 3) IH Trailer site

preparation, and 4) IH Trailer furnishings procurement.

(3) The CTD SV is predominately driven by; 1) The delayed start of construction for the permanent public address system around the West Area Tank Farms. Fieldwork in West Area

has been delayed due to late completion of West Area excavation permits and crossing lists due to lack of engineering resources. Construction in S complex and T complex began in

May, while U Farm began in June 2018. B complex is expected to begin in July with full system function testing expected in September 2018, after vendor tie in.

Impacts

(1) 1) There is no impact to field installation and turnover of fence-line monitoring equipment or to any other control accounts. Fence-line equipment will not be installed in the farms

until FY20. Procurement is underway and progress payments/milestones have been made. Anticipated receipt is in quarter one of FY19. 2) Initial fieldwork and site preparation can

begin without equipment receipt. Currently, receipt of the equipment does not impact completion of scope by end of FY milestone. 3) Project variance does not impact any other control

accounts and is stand-alone having no impact to critical path. Final OAT and Test Report will be delayed until Q4 FY18, approximately nine months behind schedule. 4) Contracts have

been awarded for stack monitor equipment procurements and field installation construction. Work packages are complete for the first two farms and fieldwork has commenced. The

project manager is currently planning to have installation of stack monitors taking place simultaneously in two different farms, in order to meet completion milestones. Project float is

five days.

(2) The increased duration to complete trailer sketches, layouts, site evaluations, and DOE real property review has driven the receipt of a trailer into Jul18 and the performance of

install/site prep activities into Q4 of FY18. The project forecasts to have the trailer received, prepped, and installed by Sep18. Project maintains 11 working days of float. No other

control accounts are impacted by these delays.

(3) West Area construction contract has been awarded, and all Phase 2C/2D speaker poles, mounts, assemblies, and reader boards have been received. Ground Scanning and work

packages for West Area Farms has been completed. Remaining work packages for reader board installations are in progress. West area construction excavation and fieldwork began in S

complex and T complex and U Farm in May/June with B complex to follow in July 2018. Phase 2C/2D Reader boards are expected to be installed in August 2018. Project is expected to

be completed in September 2018.

Corrective Actions

(1) Project representatives will be sent to vendor location to support ongoing development of their QA program to meet Tank Farm's needs. Following QA development and sign-off

procurements can proceed. Work package closeout for Pilot Scale Testing required prior to turnover of equipment. Engineering staff has been assigned to monitor and status closeout of

each ECN and work package. Identify and revise necessary procedures to integrate vapor monitoring and detection system (VMDS)into farm operations. Project manager is currently

coordinating this effort with procedures organization.

(2) No corrective actions.

(3) West Area construction contract has been awarded, and all Phase 2C/2D speaker poles, mounts, assemblies, and reader boards have been received. Ground scanning and work

packages for West Area farms has been completed. Remaining work packages for reader board installations are in progress. West Area construction excavation and fieldwork began in S

UNCLASSIFIED




UNCLASSIFIED


complex and T complex and U Farm in May/June 2018 with B complex to follow in July. Phase 2C/2D Reader boards are expected to be installed in August 2018. Project is expected to

be completed in September 2018.

5.02.01 – Retrieval/Closure Program -$5,019k



$213,852k $208,833k $213,149k -$5,019k 0.98 -$4,315k 0.98


This effort is behind schedule. This element’s BAC of $224,879k represents 4.5% of the total contract budget. 95.1% of the effort is scheduled to have been completed, while 92.9% has




The primary contributors are 1) Interim SX Barrier – South Construction -$3,531k and 2) Direct Push Characterization & Sampling -$1,209k

Causes

(1) The CTD SV is due to delay of the site preparation and asphalt placement over the southern portion of SX tank farm. The project identified an issue with the protective structures

sizing. Some of the protective structures did not allow for enough clearance of some of the electrical panels. The project has ordered larger protective structures to allow for enough

clearance for the electrical panels. The protective structures need to be in place before the gravel can be set and the asphalt can be installed. The subcontractor will start setting the gravel

in areas that do not need a new protective structure. The start of the barrier site preparation was delayed as result of changes to the facility requirements to house the work crew and

support Self-contained breathing apparatus (SCBA) bottle equipment / personal protective equipment. The subcontractor originally proposed a tent for the field crew; decision was

made to order a trailer. During planning it was determined the original sizing of the trailer was not sufficient to house all the subcontractor and field resources as well as SCBA bottle

equipment. Additionally, progress of grading activities was interrupted by numerous cathodic protection interferences.

(2) The CTD SV for this A Farm scope is due to the delay of interim barrier construction in the SX Tank Farm. The SX work was a precursor to the A Farm direct push activities

(driving logging boreholes and performing borehole logging). Resources were being shared between the two tank farms due to the subcontractor only having one piece of equipment and

one crew to perform both projects. With SX being the priority, the A Farm scope was delayed two months and did not get started until May18.

Impacts

(1) Currently no schedule impact to PBI or SX Barrier North construction.

(2) Scope scheduled for FY18 will push into FY19.

Corrective Actions

(1) The project has approved and project OT for the construction subcontract and construction support staff to recovery schedule during Jul18.

(2) No corrective action planned.

UNCLASSIFIED




UNCLASSIFIED


5.01.02 – DST Space Management -$4,085k



$193,410k $189,325k $191,005k -$4,085k 0.98 -$1,680k 0.99


This effort is behind schedule. This element’s BAC of $204,805k represents 4.1% of the total contract budget. 94.4% of the effort is scheduled to have been completed, while 92.4% has


float of linked tasks is -95 days. The BEI indicates that a number of tasks equal to 96.9% of those baselined to finish have actually finished. The CEI indicates that 50% of the tasks


The primary contributors are 1) ETF/LERF/TEDF Operations & Maintenance – OP2 -$2,438k and 2) Replace ETF Basin Covers -$1,090k

Causes

(1) The CTD SV within this control account is due to the following: The Effluent Treatment Facility (ETF) Main Treatment Train (MTT) operation has been limited due to successive

failures of various plant equipment. The limited MTT operation has caused a delay to complete the first 1 million gallon processing campaign of Liquid Effluent Retention Facility

(LERF) Basin 43. This delay has impacted the start of successive LERF processing campaigns. Additionally, in late Oct17 a priority was placed on completing the CY17 RCRA tank

inspections. During the periods of Oct17 through Dec17, 3 ETF tanks were inspected. These tank inspections further delayed completion of the first 1 million gallon processing

campaign of LERF 43.

(2) The CTD SV is due to starting the contractor fieldwork late on LERF Basin 42 cover Replacement. This work was delayed until the design completed. Design was delayed while the

ETF personnel reviewed the effectiveness of the previous basin cover replacement at Basin #43. The delay in design and award to the subcontractor resulted in delay in procurement of

the material for the basin. The pump down of the heel basin also took longer than expected, further delaying cover removal activities.

Impacts

(1) No impact to critical path or other control accounts. The facility is still forecasting completion of processing campaigns for FY18.

(2) The cover material has been ordered and delivery anticipated for mid-July 2018 when subcontractor is ready to install.

Corrective Actions

(1) Facility is still predicting completion of all forecasted processing campaigns in FY18.

(2) No future corrective action planned beyond utilizing lessons learned from this initial LERF Basin 43 cover replacement to aid in future ETF LERF Basin Cover replacements.

1.10.3 Current Month Cost Variance: $1,292k Level 3 VAR analysis remains focused on the largest contributors to the CM CVs.

5.01.05 – Project Support $1,527k

Current Period – In Thousands

UNCLASSIFIED




UNCLASSIFIED


CM BCWS CM BCWP CM ACWP CM SV CM SPI CM CV CM CPI

$11,263k $12,779k $11,252k $1,516k 1.14 $1,527k 1.14

The primary contributors are 1) Chemical Cartridge Evaluation $325k and 2) Strobic Air Upgrade $256k (all others CAs do not meet threshold levels)

Cause

(1) The CM CV is a result of labor efficiencies gained during cartridge field sampling. A change in execution allowed the same crew to sample multiple tanks simultaneously using two

machines, thereby accomplishing two cartridge tests under the same shift, resulting in the labor efficiencies mentioned. Additionally, due to the completion of sampling activities

simultaneously the National Lab is experiencing efficiencies related to the development of the associated reports simultaneously as well.

(2) The CM CV is due to less engineering and project management support required than planned. Project was originally planned to be tested/assembled on-site with far greater resource

requirements than what is actually required. Testing and assembly will be completed in Richland at an off-site facility.

Impact

(1) Positive variance anticipated to remain positive at year-end

(2) Less Engineering and Project Management support will be required throughout the duration of the project. Project was originally planned to be tested/assembled in the field. EAC

has been updated to align with anticipated savings going forward.

Corrective Action

(1) and (2) No Corrective Actions Planned

1.10.4 Cumulative-To-Date Cost Variance: $19,598k Level 3 VAR analysis remains focused on the largest contributors to the CTD CVs.

5.02.08 – A/AX Retrieval Common Upgrades & Design -$30,434k


BCWS BCWP ACWP SV SPI CV CPI

$116,750k $112,676k $143,109k -$4,074k 0.97 -$30,434k 0.79


This effort is over cost to date and projected to overrun at completion. This element’s BAC of $134,149k represents 2.7% of the total contract budget. The CPI indicates that for every

dollar expended, 0.79 dollars of value have been earned.

The primary contributors are 1) AX-102/AX-104 Equipment Removal -$21,552k, 2) A/AX Infrastructure Installation -$5,255k, and 3) A/AX Ventilation Installation -$4,752k

Causes

(1) The CTD CV is primarily due to higher engineering and construction subcontractor cost and WRPS support labor cost than planned to perform the work. WRPS labor incurred more

work package planners and construction support personnel than planned to mitigate impacts associated with vapor controls and complexities associated with field activities. Engineering

subcontractor costs were primarily due to additional planning required to support and resolve issues associated with leaving 801A slab, LLE grout waste container, and spray ring

designs. Additional subcontractor and support labor is required to complete the work scope due to impacts with Beryllium issues and associated controls, extreme cold and snow delays

UNCLASSIFIED




UNCLASSIFIED


in Dec16, Jan17, and Feb17, reallocation of construction subcontractor labor to higher priority work scope at AY and C-105, ongoing tank vapor inefficiencies from daily vapor impacts

of resources using SCBA and vapor associated HAMTC Stop Work letter. In Jul16, 02C and 04A Pit Clean Outs were delayed due to lack of respiratory equipment caused by stop

work/injunction. In Apr17, there were stop work orders related to SCBA face piece cleaning issues and LO/TO issues. In addition, the project experienced resource reallocation to

higher priority AY-102 and C-105. Additionally, $3,685k was added to this control account from the addition of new contract scope from the Request for Equitable Adjustment (REA)

related to the vapor impacts experienced for FY16. This REA has been negotiated by DOE-ORP and was implemented into the baseline via BCR RPP-16-179. Further, this BCR utilized

a non-standard resource “7 - G&A Exemptions.” Though this REA accounts for the Vapors Impacts as a whole, it does not reflect the comprehensive impact by element of cost. In

May17, there was a "Take Cover" and Facility Closure due to the PUREX tunnel incident. On Tuesday, May 9th, 2017, the DOE-RL activated the Hanford Emergency Operations

Center after a 20-foot section of a tunnel next to PUREX in the 200E area collapsed. All employees north of the Wye Barricade were instructed to take cover by sheltering in place that

morning and as a further precaution were sent home from work early later that day. On Wednesday, May 10th, 2017, work north of the Wye Barricade was restricted to response

operations and essential personnel only. By Thursday, May 11th, 2017, most workers returned to work and were on a normal work schedule; however, portions of the 200 east area

remained under restricted access. A CAA was established, thereby limiting work entry in the Farms. On Saturday, May 20th, 2017, the CAA was lifted and Hanford was on a regular

work schedule after crews successfully placed a protective cover over the tunnel. For approximately 5 working days in May17, the project experienced cost but no performance. In

Aug17, there were delays associated with unexpected site conditions related to the AX04-R7C Thermocouple removal that required additional time to plan, prepare, and safely remove.

In Oct17 and Nov17 there were delays associated with unexpected site conditions related to the AX04-Riser 1A sluicer removal and AX02 Risers 5A spray-ring removals that required

additional time to plan, prepare, and safely remove. In Jan18, there were 2.5 days of stop work issued due to issues associated with the respirators that are used with the SCBA gear as

well as 2 days of lost work due to weather related issues. In Feb18, there were 4.5 days of stop work issued due to issues associated with the respirators that are used with the SCBA

gear, as well as lost work due to respirator equipment availability related issues associated with the SCBA stop work. In Mar18, there were 3 days of stop work issued due to issues

associated with the respirators that are used with the SCBA gear, as well as lost work time due to respirator equipment availability related issues associated with the SCBA stop work. In

addition, there was 1.5 days lost due to POR126 & POR127 exhausters shutting down, because filters with moisture buildup needed to be changed out. In Apr18, there were

approximately 3 days of impacts due to issues associated with respirator equipment availability, odors, and high winds shutting down field work, along with additional work package

planning due to the configuration and degraded nature of the pumps in AX04B R14, AX02 R1A P-200, and AX04 R5B. In May18 there was approximately 1 day of impacts due to

issues associated with respirator equipment availability. In addition, there were delays associated with work package planning and additional fieldwork due to the configuration and

degraded nature of the pumps in AX04B R14, AX02 R1A P-200, and AX04 R5B Pump. In Jun18, there was approximately 0.5 day impact due to issues associated with respirator

equipment availability. Additionally, an unplanned mock-up was required for proof of concept of the new equipment removal technique that will be used to remove the submersible

pump from riser AX04-R5B.

(2) The CTD CV is primarily the result of three reasons. First, the fundamental basis for budgeted costs was experience from the C Farm. However, some of the major premises of the

design for AX was to reduce farm entries during retrieval operations, provide redundant equipment where possible, increase retrieval efficiencies, and longevity of the equipment due to

historic delays experienced in past retrievals. An example of additional costs for these enhancements is the A-285, Air and Water Service Building, which with its complexities overran

by $3.3M. Second, due to funding constraints the project has experienced in prior years, work is now being done in parallel, versus in series, as originally planned to meet the Consent

Decree milestones. This has necessitated the need of hiring additional personnel to accomplish the work. Finally, additional resources, in terms of subcontract construction personnel,

IHTs, HPTs, and other support personnel are being utilized beyond budgeted levels to comply with the Beryllium and vapor controls programs. These programs have increased the crew

sizes and decrease productivity compared to previous years.

(3) AX Ventilation Install - WP Develop/CM Admin. This LOE Work Package was scheduled from Oct15 through May16. Due to design changes and as-found field conditions, Vent

install activities continued until Jan17. In addition, issues with startup/readiness have extended the duration of support even longer. This Work Package will not be completed until the

ventilation system has been turned over to Operations. Because of the delays in installation and Readiness/startup, labor cost has been incurred for 12 additional months. The current

completion date for Readiness/Startup is in Jul18. AX Farm Ventilation Installation: At the end of installation, there were 60 Contract Action Log (CAL) items on the construction

UNCLASSIFIED




UNCLASSIFIED


contract due to as-found field conditions and ECNs. This Work Package was scheduled to be performed from Oct15 to Apr16. The design changes and as-found field conditions added

nine months to the duration of the project. The CTD CV is attributed to increased durations due to the re-planning of field activities. Additionally, WRPS labor support was higher than

planned to mitigate impacts associated with vapor controls and complexities associated with work packages needed to support field activities. Construction subcontractor costs were also

related to inefficiencies associated with reallocation of construction subcontractor labor to higher priority work scope at AY and C-105, and inefficiencies associated with vapor controls

and the HAMTC Stop Work letter. These impacts were realized during Aug17 through Nov17. AX Farm Vent Install - A/E Support During Construction: The budget for A/E support

was underestimated in the proposal. In addition, issues with installation extended the duration and level of support required from the Engineering subcontractor. The baseline for this

Work Package was Oct16 through May16, but ended in Nov16, an increase in duration of six months.

Impacts

(1) Fieldwork was delayed and performed less efficiently than planned resulting in higher costs to perform scheduled work. Adjustments to future month ETCs continue to be evaluated

and updated as work continues to be executed and vapor impacts are adjusted in the ETCs.

(2) The current CTD CV contributes to the forecasted negative VAC. There will be an unfavorable VAC at the completion of the remaining scope. All cost overruns have been

accounted for in the VAC calculation and no other activities have been impacted.

(3) 1) AX Ventilation Installation - WP Develop/CM Admin. This is a LOE Work Package that, due to delays in installation and Readiness/Startup, support was extended for twelve

(12) months. 2) AX Ventilation Installation - With the additional installation efforts required by the CALs, the negative cost trend continued, resulting in an unfavorable VAC at the

completion of the scope. The design changes and as-found field conditions extended the duration of the installation effort by nine (9) months. All cost overruns have been accounted for

in the VAC calculation and no other activities have been impacted. 3) AX Vent Install - A/E Support During Construct - The design changes increased the level of Engineering

subcontractor support as well as extended the duration of support by six (6) months. All cost overruns have been accounted for in the VAC calculation and no other activities have been

impacted.

Corrective Actions

(1), (2), and (3) No Corrective Actions Planned

5.03.01 – WTP Feed Delivery Program $22,664k



$244,286k $243,071k $220,407k -$1,215k 1.00 $22,664k 1.10


This effort is under cost to date and projected to underrun at completion. This element's BAC of $252,367k represents 5.0% of the total contract budget. The CPI indicates that for every


The primary contributors are 1) WFD Technical Baseline $2,750k and 2) Mission Integration Support Program $2,484k, and 3) Mission Analysis $2,123k

Causes

(1) 1) FY15: the CTD CV for this LOE account is primarily due to: a) Labor and subcontract efficiencies: Management and engineering resources have been utilized to perform waste

feed delivery (WFD) Technical Baseline Studies due to the lack of other resources available to perform the work. Work has been planned for experienced personnel over a longer

duration. Labor vacancies have resulted in a favorable variance due to fewer FTEs and labor hours than planned. b) WFD Technical Baseline scope is being performed primarily by

UNCLASSIFIED




UNCLASSIFIED


subcontracted resources. The actual subcontract rate is less than the planned rate. The subcontractor is experienced, has significant knowledge, and has implemented processes to

increase efficiencies in the workflow, resulting in fewer direct labor resources than planned. Due to these efficiencies in subcontracted work, there is a favorable CV. c) Both of these

factors contributes to the overhead allocations favorable variance. 2) FY14: The CTD CV is due to an underrun in labor for the entire account. The WFD Requirements Baseline being

understaffed the entire year, lead to a favorable CV. Additionally, the planned rate was higher than the actual rate for the entire account. Subcontract support for Requirements Baseline

was lower than planned for FY14, which resulted in a favorable CV.

(2) The CTD CV for this LOE account is primarily due to: 1) Labor and Staff Augmentation: Under the Mission Integration Project Controls Management work package, a scheduler is

planned to maintain the Direct Feed Low Activity Waste (DFLAW) Integration schedule. The maintenance/update of this schedule has been performed by an existing Mission

Integration Project Controls resource, and has not required retention of an additional scheduler. In addition, buyer’s technical representative (BTR) support was planned higher than

actual support experienced. The number and size of the procurement actions realized to date is less than estimated. As a result, a decreased level of BTR support has been required.

Additionally, a senior-level communication specialist was planned. An existing staff augmentation resource was utilized to perform the planned communication specialist work scope

through Jan17; however, this was a shared resource and the actual level of support was less than originally planned. As of Feb17, a subcontracted resource was retained to perform the

communication specialist scope. The subcontracted resource is less experienced, and the actual effective hourly rate is less than the planned hourly rate for this position. In addition, the

level of support required is less than full-time that was originally estimated. The level of Environment, Safety, Health and Quality (ESH&Q) support planned for LOE Integrated

Permitting Strategies and ESH&Q Program Support work packages has not been experienced. The direct resources planned under these work packages have been diverted to support

higher priority work scope, which has resulted in a lower level of support to the Integrated Permitting Strategies and Program Support scope. 2) Subcontracts: The planned subcontract

support for FY16 and FY17 was based on the actual experience for FY15. Mission Integration was re-organized during FY15 and conducted independent/external assessments to

determine/validate the effectiveness of the Mission Integration organizational changes. Several technical specialists were also retained via subcontract to provide independent technical

and integration support. However, as Mission Integration has evolved and established a foundation since the FY15 re-organization; it has not required the same level of

independent/external subcontracted support as that experienced in FY15; therefore, the actual number and value of subcontracted support is less than originally planned.

(3) The CTD CV is due to experienced efficiencies for labor, material, and staff augmentation resources. 1) Mission Analysis: a) Labor: Work scope requested by the DOE-ORP did not

require planned chemist support. During Jul15, the planned Mission Analysis group manager transitioned to an acting Level 2 manager position. A junior resource was assigned as the

Mission Analysis group manager. The actual hourly rate for the junior resource was less than the manager hourly rate utilized for planning. As of Oct17, the Mission Analysis group

manager position has been vacant. Therefore, the planned cost for a Manager has not been experienced. b) Material: Due to the advanced capabilities and performance of site standard

computers, the organization was able to utilize site standard computers, instead of the planned higher cost non-standard high-end computers. In addition, software maintenance

agreements were not renewed due to lack of quality and service provided by the vendor. 2) Operations and WFD Planning: a) Labor: Junior Chemical Engineers were utilized to

accomplish the planned work scope, with an actual hourly rate that is less than the Chemical Engineer hourly rate utilized for planning. In addition, historical costs were utilized to plan

this work; however, the effort required was not as substantial as planned. 3) System Plan Rev. 8: a) Subcontracts: Based on previous System Plan experience FTEs were budgeted to

help recover system plan overruns if needed. This support was not required. A Manager was planned to support this work scope. It was originally planned that the management support

would be provided by the Mission Analysis group manager; however, this position has been vacant since Oct17. The planned cost for a Manager has not been experienced.

Impacts

(1), (2), and (3) There is no impact to any other activities outside of this account.

Corrective Actions

(1), (2), and (3) No Corrective Actions Planned

UNCLASSIFIED




UNCLASSIFIED


5.02.02 - SST Retrieval East Area -$13,534k



$499,601k $499,267k $512,801k -$334k 1.00 -$13,534k 0.97


This effort is over cost to date and projected to overrun at completion. This element’s BAC of $501,318k represents 9.9% of the total contract budget. The CPI indicates that for every


The primary contributors are 1) C-105 Retrieval -$10,959k and 2) C-107 Retrieval -$5,102k

Causes

(1) The CTD CV is primarily due to additional engineering work to address tank as-found conditions, including higher than planned levels of radiation doses. Scope changes to mitigate

the high dose rates include C-105 hose in hose transfer line, Mobile Arm Retrieval System-Vacuum, as well as freeze protection and safety instrumented system. Engineering

subcontract, direct engineering, and construction support labor costs for installation of Automated Temperature Monitoring (ATM) system and Construction Acceptance Testing has

resulted in an unfavorable variance. In addition, the purchase of materials for the ATM system and rad-hardened cameras has contributed to the CV. Further unplanned labor costs to

complete Startup and Readiness activities, specifically the Operational Acceptance Test (OAT), impacted the variance as well. Slower than anticipated retrieval rates due to waste

characterization has made further testing on simulants and operator training necessary, all of which has resulted in additional labor charges and unplanned vendor support.

(2) The CTD CV is due to costs incurred to support removal of a failed C-107 slurry pump, impacting critical C-107 retrieval schedules. Multiple attempts to remove the failed pump

were unsuccessful when predetermined engineering limits for lift force were approached. Additionally, the project incurred costs to maintain qualified retrieval crews before and after

hard heel removal operations. Direct labor costs and subcontractor costs to support removal of the failed pump, as well as unplanned camera replacement for 3rd Technology Retrieval

have also contributed to the CV. These factors are offset by labor efficiencies in 3rd Technology Retrieval.

Impacts

(1) and (2) Cost overruns experienced to date are not recoverable as these accounts are complete.

Corrective Actions

(1) and (2) No corrective actions planned.

5.01.05 – Project Support $14,630k



$932,323k $925,651k $911,021k -$6,672k 0.99 $14,630k 1.02


UNCLASSIFIED




UNCLASSIFIED


This effort is under cost to date and projected to underrun at completion. This element's BAC of $970,444k represents 19.3% of the total contract budget. The CPI indicates that for

every dollar expended, 1.02 dollars of value have been earned.

The primary contributors are 1) Mission Integration Nuclear Safety & Engineering $3,010k 2) Central Engineering $2,612k, and 3) Central Project Controls $2,257k

Causes

(1) The CTD CV is primarily due to efficiencies realized as a result of changes in the processes used for the development of Project Implementation Plans (PIPs). Specifically, a

standardized PIP process was developed and implemented for the development and completion of multiple PIPs under the Engineering Program Integration account, which eliminated a

significant duplication of effort. Additional efficiencies were realized in FY14, when PIP templates were in development. Implementation of the standardized process and templates

required less labor, staff augmentation, and subcontracted resources to perform the PIP work scope. The implementation of a process assigning PIPs with similar objectives/scope to

subcontracted resources resulted in the realization of additional labor and subcontract efficiencies in the Nuclear Safety DSA Program Development work package. This is a LOE

account that has planned labor resources that are vacant: one Manager and one Engineer. Due to changes in the nature and volume of scope under this account, there are not any plans to

retain resources for these vacancies. This has resulted in more efficient performance of the work scope with the existing resources.

(2) The CTD CV within this LOE account is primarily due to the following: In FY15: 1) 7 FTE positions remained unfilled, the majority of which reside in the Chief Engineering

account. A favorable variance in labor in Engineering Programs account due to unfilled positions. SmartPlant Maintenance had an underrun in labor due to unfilled positions. The

existing resources within these accounts have been able to adequately, and efficiently, perform all work scope requirements to date. It was determined not necessary or critical to the

project to fill these vacancies. 2) Nuclear Safety had an underrun due to a decrease in un-reviewed safety questions (USQ) Request for Offsite Services (ROS) support and technical

safety requirement (TSR) contract de-obligations. Management determined that these contracts are not critical in performing this year work scope. 3) In addition to the underruns listed

above these resulted in an underrun in Overhead Allocations. These positive variances were partially offset due to 1) Subcontract support for SmartPlant technical services. The

subcontract for server and technical support was forecasted to be twice as much as the original estimate. This work package ended in FY15 with an unfavorable variance. 2) Chief

Engineering subcontracts being overspent by; costs for the URS Coaching of WRPS Operations were not planned but incurred in Engineering. 3) Deep Sludge unplanned additional

criteria was required by Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) during the Tall Column testing to sustain a high enough temperature to allow gas reactions in the simulant. The

additional testing criteria resulted in increased subcontractor support as well as additional direct engineering labor support. In FY14: 1) Chief Engineering was underspent due to

carrying two vacant positions throughout the year combined with a lower actual labor rate. 2) Nuclear Safety was underspent due to a lower actual labor rate even while carrying three

additional FTEs. 3) Engineering Programs was underspent due to a lower actual labor rate. Additionally, the underruns listed above resulted in an underrun in overhead allocations. The

positive variance is partially offset by the following: 1) Unplanned additional criteria was required by PNNL during the Tall Column testing to sustain a high enough temperature to

allow gas reactions in the simulant. The additional testing criteria resulted in increased subcontractor support as well as additional direct engineering labor support. 2) Costs for the URS

Coaching of WRPS Operations were not planned but incurred in Engineering. The purpose of the coaching contract is to coach shift managers to improve their understanding of DSA

and TSR while establishing a new Shift Technical Engineer position and training program.

(3) The majority of the CTD CV is from past years in this LOE account and driven by: 1. Baseline Management system plan scenario support only requiring three of 10 scenario runs in

2016. Baseline Contracts continue to be favorable due to Lifecycle scenarios delayed in FY18 awaiting DOE directions. 2. The FY16 IRM cost for O&M Support was less than planned

due to WRPS requiring fewer IRM Services than in prior years and the transition of LMSI support to MSA. 3. Functional Orgs Project Controls had a rate delta due to junior level PCEs

and the planned rate being higher than the actual rate (FOPC now has its own WBS). 4. Funds and Cost Management eliminated 3 P070 positions in FY16 due to employees moving to

other organizations. 5. Continuing Resolution constraints in the first part of FY17 and now FY18 decreased spending and created delays in the timely backfill of empty positions along

with a management challenge to lower cost by 2% in FY18.

Impacts

(1) There is no impact to any other activities/accounts outside of this account.

UNCLASSIFIED




UNCLASSIFIED


(2) No impact. Work is complete.

(3) No Impact - the differences are managed within Central Project Controls by the management team for this LOE account and reflected in the ETCs.

Corrective Actions (1), (2), and (3) No Corrective Actions Planned

1.10.5 Variance at Completion: $17,052k Level 3 VAR analysis remains focused on the largest absolute contributors to the VAC. Largest dollar values, either favorable or unfavorable, will be reported.

5.02.08 – A/AX Retrieval Common Upgrades & Design -$38,043k

Cumulative-to-Date (in thousands) At Completion (in thousands)

BCWS BCWP ACWP SV SPI CV CPI BAC EAC TCPI VAC

$116,750k $112,676k $143,109k -$4,074k 0.97 -$30,434k 0.79 $134,149k $172,193k 0.74 -$38,043k


This effort is projected to overrun at completion. The TCPI-EAC indicates that to achieve the EAC, every dollar expended in the future will have to earn 0.74 dollars of value.

(1) AX-102/AX-104 Equipment Removal -$21,923k and (2) A/AX Infrastructure Installation -$11,450k

Causes

(1) The VAC is mainly attributed to higher than planned engineering and construction subcontractor costs and WRPS support labor to perform the work. WRPS labor incurred more

work package planners and construction management support personnel than planned to mitigate impacts associated with vapor and Beryllium controls and complexities associated with

work packages needed to support field activities. Construction subcontractor costs were related to inefficiencies associated with newly identified Beryllium issues and associated

controls, extreme cold and snow delays in Dec16, Jan17, and Feb17, reallocation of construction subcontractor labor to higher priority work scope at AY and C-105, and inefficiencies

associated with vapor controls and the HAMTC Stop Work letter. Engineering subcontractor costs were due to additional planning required to support and resolve issues associated with

leaving 801A slab, LLE grout waste container and spray ring design. In May17, there was a "Take Cover" and Facility Closure due to the PUREX tunnel incident that resulted in

approximately 5 working days where the project experienced cost but no performance. In Aug17, there were delays associated with unexpected site conditions related to the AX04-R7C

Thermocouple removal that required additional time to plan, prepare, and safely remove. Sep17 - There were delays associated with the removal of a sluicer from Riser 1B. The sluicer

was lodged in the riser and crews had to use additional precautions to remove the sluicer safely and without damaging the current state of the sluicer. Oct17 – Crews attempted to

remove the pump from riser AX02-R5A to discover the pump was stuck in waste that had solidified on the bottom of the tank. Additional time was spent creating new work packages

along with engineering reviews before work was able to resume as there was a threat of the pump being broken if too much force was placed on it while trying to remove the equipment

from the tank. In Oct and Nov17, there were delays associated with unexpected site conditions related to the AX04-Riser 1A sluicer removal and AX02 Risers 5A spray-ring removal

that required additional time to plan, prepare, and safely remove. Additionally, $1,289k was added to this control account from the addition of new contract scope from the REA related

to the vapor impacts experienced for FY16. This REA has been negotiated by DOE-ORP and was implemented into the baseline via baseline change request RPP-16-179. Further, this

BCR utilized a non-standard resource “7 - G&A Exemptions.” Though this REA accounts for the Vapors Impacts as a whole, it does not reflect the comprehensive impact by element of

cost. Jan18 there were 2.5 days of stop work issued due to issues associated with the respirators that are used with the SCBA gear as well as 2 days of lost work due to weather related

issues. Feb18 there were 4.5 days of stop work issued due to issues associated with the respirators that are used with the SCBA gear as well as lost work due to respirator equipment

availability related issues associated with the SCBA stop work. In Mar18, there were 4.5 days of stop work issued due to issues associated with the respirators that are used with the

UNCLASSIFIED




UNCLASSIFIED


SCBA gear, as well as lost work time due to respirator equipment availability related issues associated with the SCBA stop work. In addition, there are 1.5 days lost due to POR126 and

POR127 exhausters shutting down expectantly, impacting field activities. In Apr18, there were approximately 3 days of impacts due to issues associated with respirator equipment

availability (1/4 day), odors (1/4 day), and high winds shutting down fieldwork (~3 days), along with additional work package planning due to the configuration and degraded nature of

the pumps in AX04B R14, AX02 R1A P-200, and AX04 R5B. In May18, there were was approximately 3 days of impacts due to issues associated with respirator equipment

availability. In addition, there were delays associated with work package planning and additional fieldwork due to the configuration and degraded nature of the AX04B R14, AX02 R1A

P-200, and AX04 R5B pumps. In Jun18, there was approximately 0.5 day impact due to issues associated with respirator equipment availability. Additionally, an unplanned mock-up

was required for proof of concept of the new equipment removal technique that will be used to remove the submersible pump from riser AX04-R5B.

(2) The VAC is primarily the result of three reasons. First, the fundamental basis for budgeted costs was experience from the C Farm. However, some of the major premises of the

design for AX was to reduce farm entries during retrieval operations, provide redundant equipment where possible, increase retrieval efficiencies, and longevity of the equipment due to

historic delays experienced in past retrievals. An example of additional costs for these enhancements is the A-285, Air and Water Service Building, which with its complexities overran

by $3.5M. Second, due to funding constraints the project has experienced in prior years, work is now being done in parallel versus in series as originally planned to meet the Consent

Decree milestones. This has necessitated the need of hiring additional personnel to accomplish the work. Finally, additional resources, in terms of subcontract construction personnel,

IHTs, HPTs, and other support personnel are being utilized beyond budgeted levels to comply with the Beryllium and vapor controls programs. These programs have increased the crew

sizes and decrease productivity compared to previous years. Note: The increase in the BAC from the CTD CV is due to installation activities taking longer to perform, resulting in

longer forecasted use of construction crews and WRPS Labor

Impacts

(1) The impact will need to be evaluated against the entire A/AX project and Retrieval. Adjustments to future month ETCs continue to be evaluated. The dollarized value of the vapor,

Beryllium, and other impacts will constantly be evaluated in order to assure ETCs remain aligned to the projected performance that will be realized.

(2) The VAC will continue until the A/AX Infrastructure upgrade scope is complete. All cost overruns have been accounted for in the VAC calculation and no other activities have been

impacted.

Corrective Actions

(1) and (2) No corrective actions planned.

5.03.01 – WTP Feed Delivery Program $22,869k

Cumulative-to-Date (in thousands) At Completion (in thousands)

BCWS BCWP ACWP SV SPI CV CPI BAC EAC TCPI VAC

$244,286k $243,071k $220,407k -$1,215k 0.96 $22,664k 1.10 $252,367k $229,498k 1.02 $22,869k


This effort is projected to underrun at completion. The TCPI-EAC indicates that to achieve the EAC, every dollar expended in the future will have to earn 1.02 dollars of value.

(1) Mission Integration Support Program $2,778k, (2) WFD Technical Baseline $2,750k, (3) Mission Analysis $2,557k, and (4) Waste Feed Delivery Technical Baseline

$2,129k

Causes

UNCLASSIFIED




UNCLASSIFIED


(1) The VAC for this LOE account is primarily due to: Labor and Staff Augmentation: Under the Mission Integration Project Controls Management work package, a scheduler is

planned to maintain the DFLAW Integration schedule. The maintenance/update of this schedule has been performed by an existing Mission Integration Project Controls resource, and

has not required retention of an additional scheduler. In addition, BTR support was planned at a higher FTE, with actual support experienced. The number and size of the procurement

actions realized to date is less than estimated. As a result, a decreased level of BTR support has been required. Additionally, a senior-level communication specialist was planned. An

existing staff augmentation resource was utilized to perform the planned communication specialist work scope through Jan\17. However, this was a shared resource and the actual level

of support was less than originally planned. As of Feb17, a subcontracted resource was retained to perform the communication specialist scope. The subcontracted resource was less

experienced, and the actual effective hourly rate was less than the planned hourly rate for this position. In addition, the level of support required is less than full-time that was originally

estimated. The level of ESH&Q support planned for LOE Integrated Permitting Strategies and ESH&Q Program Support work packages has not been experienced. The direct resources

planned under these work packages have been diverted to support higher priority work scope, which has resulted in a lower level of support to the Integrated Permitting Strategies and

Program Support scope. Subcontracts: The planned subcontract support for FY16 and FY17 was based on the actual experience for FY15. Mission Integration was re-organized during

FY15 and conducted independent/external assessments to determine/validate the effectiveness of the Mission Integration organizational changes. Several technical specialists were also

retained via subcontract to provide independent technical and integration support. However, as Mission Integration has evolved and established a foundation since the FY15

reorganization, it has not required the same level of independent/external subcontracted support as that experienced in FY15. Therefore, the actual number and value of subcontracted

support is less than originally planned.

(2) The VAC for this LOE account in FY15 is primarily due to 1) Labor and subcontract efficiencies. Management and engineering resources have been utilized to perform WFD

technical baseline studies due to the lack of other resources available to perform the work. Work has been planned for experienced personnel over a longer duration. Labor vacancies

have resulted in a favorable variance. 2) WFD Technical Baseline scope is being performed primarily by subcontracted resources. The actual subcontract rate is less than the planned

rate. The subcontractor is experienced, has significant knowledge, and has implemented processes to increase efficiencies in the workflow resulting in fewer direct labor resources than

planned. Due to these efficiencies in subcontracted work there, is a favorable CV. 3) Both of these factors contribute to the favorable overhead allocations variance. The VAC is FY14 is

primarily due to an underrun in labor for the entire account. The WFD Requirements Baseline being understaffed the entire year lead to a CV. Additionally; the planned rate was higher

than the actual rate for the entire account. Subcontract support for requirements baseline was planned higher than was used, which resulted in a CV.

(3) The VAC is due to experienced efficiencies for labor, material, and staff augmentation resources. 1) Mission Analysis Labor: Work scope requested by the DOE-ORP did not require

planned chemist support. During Jul15, the planned Mission Analysis group manager transitioned to an acting Level 2 manager position. A junior resource was assigned as the Mission

Analysis group manager. The actual hourly rate for the junior resource was less than the manager hourly rate utilized for planning. As of Oct17, the Mission Analysis group manager

position has been vacant. Therefore, the planned cost for a manager has not been experienced. Currently, it is anticipated that this position will not be backfilled. 2) Mission Analysis

Material: Due to the advanced capabilities and performance of site standard computers, the organization was able to utilize site standard computers, instead of the planned higher cost

non-standard high-end computers. In addition, software maintenance agreements were not renewed due to lack of quality and service provided by the vendor. 3) Operations and WFD

Planning Labor: Junior chemical engineers were utilized to accomplish the planned work scope, with an actual hourly rate that is less than the chemical engineer hourly rate utilized for

planning. In addition, historical costs were utilized to plan this work; however, the effort required was not as substantial as planned. 4) System Plan Rev. 8 Subcontracts: Based on

previous System Plan experience higher FTEs were budgeted to help recover system plan overruns if needed, but this support was not required. A manager was planned to support this

work scope. It was originally planned that the management support would be provided by the Mission Analysis group Manager; however, this position has been vacant since Oct17.

Therefore, the planned cost for a manager has not been experienced. Currently, it is anticipated that this position will not be backfilled.

(4) The VAC is primarily due to the following: There is a labor rate usage in the Chemical Engineers assigned to the WFD Technical Baseline. They include junior personal resulting in

a lower actual rate vs. the planning rate. There are two unfilled positions (E010) that are budgeted for, but not filled earlier in FY18 due to a hiring freeze. These positions will be filled

in the last quarter of the FY. There has been delay of materials in procuring materials, due to legal issues. Management has determined that this delay has eliminated the need for the

subcontract for Reliability Maintenance/Evaluation during this fiscal year, which contributes $1,337k of the favorable variance. In FY17, a variance is primarily due to labor and

UNCLASSIFIED




UNCLASSIFIED


subcontract efficiencies. Labor vacancies have resulted in a favorable variance. Chemical Engineers assigned to the WFD Technical Baseline include more junior personnel resulting in

a lower actual rate vs. the planning rate. Subcontract work is being utilized less than originally planned. This account does carry a CV from FY16 made of labor, overhead allocations,

subcontracts, and materials.

Impacts (1) and (2) There is no impact to baseline activities outside of this account.

(3) There are no impacts to baseline activities outside of this account. The hourly rate difference between the planning rate and the actual experienced rate will continue to

increase/contribute to the current CTD CV.

(4) No impact. The CV has been reflected in the EACs.

Corrective Actions

(1), (2), (3), and (4) No corrective actions planned.

1.11 Supplemental Discussions

1.11.1 Early Change Notification Change Proposal and Planning Summary: Several Change Proposals (CPs) and Requests for Equitable Adjustment (REAs) are in process and in various stages of negotiations and/or

final Contract Modifications. WRPS is providing the following data as an early notification to the client of scope, schedule, and budget proposed and expected to be incorporated in the

future. WRPS will account for AUW making proposed budget changes as necessary until final negotiations are completed and received via a contract modification. CPs will be included

in this summary until the final contract modifications are received.

Table 1-6: Early Change Notification

1.11.2 Program Risk Assessment Management of TOC risks continued in Jun18. TOC key risks cross cutting the various programs and projects are identified below along with their associated ongoing/planned handling

actions, status of the handling actions, any emergent quality issues, staffing, alternative courses of action or other problems that may impact the baseline scope.

WRPSC-0001-R: Contract Direction Not Received When Required (NTE)

Actions/Recovery Plans (Status/Effectiveness)

Establish NTEs for work to be negotiated maximizing authorized funding (ongoing)

Issues/Impacts WRPS has identified ~$20M in scope offsets to make funding available for these items

Proposed $ FY16 Proposed $ FY17 Proposed $ FY18 Total Proposed Amt

$9,246 $14,463 $85,896 $100,359

$917 $12,952 $9,029 $22,898

$123,257

-$79,502

$43,755

Dollars in Thousands

Total CPs Submitted To Be Negotiated

Negotiated - Mod in Process

Total Change Proposals in process

AUW values in the Program log on above CPs

Early Change Notifications not yet authorized

UNCLASSIFIED




UNCLASSIFIED


-SX Interim Barrier Phase 3

-Test Bed Initiative

Alternatives (Staffing/Quality) None

Recovery Implementation Establish NTEs for work to be negotiated maximizing authorized funding. Issue weekly critical needs list that includes NTEs. Two year budget passed.

WRPSC-0002-R: Resource Not Available When Required


Resource loaded scheduling where appropriate (ongoing)

Metrics to trend hiring and attrition (ongoing)

Implement additional training classes for IHTs, HPTs, and NCOs as needed to proactively address forecast growth and attrition. (ongoing)

Issues/Impacts Technical resources needed for CVAP support (atmospheric scientist)

Alternatives (Staffing/Quality) Latest forecast for CH reduction of IHTs shows both a small reduction and a delay in the planned ROF. The ROF still presents an opportunity, but may be delayed a quarter of two due to recent halt in PFP demolition.

Recovery Implementation Scope and skill mix alignment reviewed as part of scope deferrals. (ongoing)

Improve coordination with HPTs and fieldwork (ongoing)

Posting subcontracted staff resources and reach back.

Weekly meetings with HR to determine staffing needs and fill necessary resource gaps.

WRPSC-0003-R: Tank Vapors Control Impact Project Execution


Engage w/workforce to identify PPE issues and communicate resolution (ongoing)

Issues/Impacts Tank vapors continue to result in unexpected work stoppages and worker safety as well as project performance are negatively impacted.

AP farm moved back to using SCBA

Bottles nearing expiration, cracks, wearing out and there is a concern of availability of bottles with the increase in fieldwork for FY18


Recovery Implementation Developing/Implementing Comprehensive Vapors Action Plan

Hanford Atomic Metal Trades Council (HAMTC) has jointly agreed to allow use of full-face air-purifying respirators (FFAPRs) in Hanford’s SY Farm for specific work evolutions.

BCR to evaluate FFAPR in more tank farms.

WRPSC-0004-R: DST Space Not Available


Continue Evaporator Campaigns.

Continue level rise modifications.

DST Integrity Program and risk evaluation/recommendations document (complete- RPP-ASMT-61284)

UNCLASSIFIED




UNCLASSIFIED


Test Bed Initiative

Issues/Impacts Evaluation of AN/AW level rise


Recovery Implementation Perform further DST level rise analysis for AN/AW farms (Planning)

Reinstate the Cross Site Transfer Lines (Planning)

EC-08: April 20-May 3 (Complete)

EC-09: June 20- July 3

WRPSC-0005-R: Tank Integrity in East is Compromised


Perform DST Integrity Program and risk evaluation (RPP-ASMT-61284) and implement recommendations. UT scans of the AY-101 primary tank wall indicate a new site of wall thinning with up to 26% loss, evaluation and extent of condition is in progress. WRPS is waiting on evaluation/extent of conditions report to determine the current risk level. The evaluation will determine additional handling actions. WRPS may need to prepare a plan in advance to empty AY-101. Install transfer line through AY02A. Increase frequency of ECs (Proposed Handling Action).

Issues/Impacts Reprioritizing work

Wall thinning has been found in AY-101


Recovery Implementation Continue UT inspections of primary tank walls and annulus floors (nominal 3 per year)

Consider additional annulus floor UT inspections as resources allow.

Continue tank sampling and chemistry program to ensure waste chemistry prohibits corrosion

Continue development of technology to inspect underneath the tank primary liner.

Continue development of technology to inspect primary liner floor (not accessible for UT)

WRPSC-0006-R: Tank Integrity in West is Compromised


Perform DST Integrity Program and risk evaluation (RPP-ASMT-61284) and implement recommendations

Initiate efforts to reinstate/qualify cross-site transfer lines - Continue pre-project activities to restore cross-site transfer line operability

Issues/Impacts Unable to pump waste in West Area to available space will have massive cost consequences


Recovery Implementation Continue UT inspections of primary tank walls and annulus floors (nominal 3 per year).

Consider additional annulus floor UT inspections as resources allow.

Continue tank sampling and chemistry program to ensure waste chemistry prohibits corrosion

Continue development of technology to inspect underneath the tank primary liner

UNCLASSIFIED




UNCLASSIFIED


WRPSC-0007-R: Lack of Adequate Critical Spares


Conduct critical spares evaluation (ongoing)

Plan refurbishment of critical spares into baseline (ongoing)

Procurement of usable spares (example LERF pumps).

Issues/Impacts Delays to operations based on lead-time for procurements.


Recovery Implementation Establishment of maintenance organization is providing effective tool for addressing full scope of issues with spares allowing for more effective problem resolution (ongoing – providing benefit)

Procurement/Fabrication of Spare Pumps (ongoing)

Critical spares for ETF are being divided into WRPS, Joint, and ORP owned risks. This division will help WRPS prioritize which components/spares need to be elevated and possibly included in the schedule/baseline.

WRPSC-0008-R: Requirements Changes/Interpretations of Requirements


Review contract directed changes per procedures/process and evaluate for downstream impacts to fieldwork.

Prepare REAs as appropriate to respond to directed changes (ongoing)

Use agreed implementation plan (ongoing)

LAWPS locked down current code of record.

DSA amendment to isolate nitrogen blanket for supernate line from slurry cross site transfer line

Issues/Impacts NTE work.

Vapors Control boundaries (fences, roads, infrastructure etc.)


Recovery Implementation Focus team created for Beryllium has been established

Independent expert review of LAWPS leads team to explore alternative approaches and challenge unnecessary requirements

WRPSC-0009-R: Aging TOC Facilities and Infrastructure


Maintain annual updates to Infrastructure Stewardship Plan (ongoing – funding has limited effectiveness)

Infrastructure Stewardship Plan for FY18 integrated with TOC risk management.

Issues/Impacts A risk exists that aging infrastructure fails more often than anticipated and requires more upkeep and maintenance than expected.

IQRPE will be completed at ETF and 242-A.

CR funding could negatively impact infrastructure upgrade plans.

Examples of realized risk:

Multiple failed fire systems and panels, LERF cover basin, Transfer Pumps, PUREX tunnel collapse/PFP (other contractors risk which cause WRPS delays), Cross site Transfer lines, Waste Transfer Lines (WTP/ETF), AW/AN Vacuum Pumps, UX 302A Catch Tank, PB-1 Failure


UNCLASSIFIED




UNCLASSIFIED


Recovery Implementation Identify and prioritize infrastructure upgrades (ongoing)

Execute top ISP projects

Do a risk analysis of facilities and infrastructure (example PUREX Tunnel)

System health program at ETF (Started)

Conduct ISP project rankings

WRPSC-0010-R: Complex Integration of Fieldwork


Utilize rolling 8 week work planning process and weekly integration meetings (ongoing)

T4 Integration weekly meeting (ongoing)

Issues/Impacts Waste disturbing activities requirements/guidelines will dictate a path forward.

Weather has impacted fieldwork (delays and work cancellations).

LOTO is a realized risk.

Be impacts

Significant growth is expected in FY18 and this risk is expected to become more prominent as project scope expands.


Recovery Implementation Continue conducting T-4 integration meetings to allow Sr. Management the opportunity to evaluate the following work plans to determine if integration is needed before executing

Continue to work with Other Hanford Contractors to ensure that support systems are available and will not impact Operations

WRPSC-0011-R: Unexpected Field Conditions Encountered


Perform field walk downs as needed prior to design (ongoing)

Perform radiological surveys prior to design work or as field conditions allow (ongoing)

Utilize GPR surveys in and around areas to be excavated (ongoing)

Investigate performance of riser/pit inspections w/o removal of cover blocks with utilization of advance technology (cameras) (proposed)

Redesign of retrieval systems (above ground) to minimize excavation needs.

Early operational checks for transfer pumps and scheduled replacements.

Issues/Impacts Cost and schedule delays

SX Interim barrier project drawings found to be out of date

SX Interim barrier impacted by legacy electrical and water line coating similarity.

In Pit Heating used the standard cover block core catch method resulting in damage to in pit equipment due to accumulation of concrete.


Recovery Implementation Perform geophysical surface scanning (Ground Penetrating Radar - GPR) and visual inspection/sampling during geotechnical test pitting and borehole drilling (well before site preparation activities) Look for voids and buried debris. Confirm location of utilities in excavation footprint.

UNCLASSIFIED




UNCLASSIFIED


WRPSC-0012-R: Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) Availability Impacts Fieldwork Execution


Manage mask/cartridge/bottle needs across TOC (Ongoing)

Establish interface with Hanford Fire Department for support (Ongoing)

Procure additional bottles/masks/cartridges based on forecasted needs (Ongoing)

Engage workforce to identify PPE issues and communicate resolution (Ongoing)

Develop and implement new software system for an inventory database at mask issuing stations (Ongoing)

Issues/Impacts Continuing resolution may impact funding availability.


Recovery Implementation The possibility of using cartridges (phasing in of cartridge use for AP Farm)

WRPSC-0013-R: Estimate Uncertainty


Continue estimate benchmarking.

Continue use of estimate templates.

Get additional resources.

Review of LAWPS estimate process (Ongoing)

Clearly communicate scope definitions.

Develop and maintain MR model and BCR Tracking Tool

Issues/Impacts Weather Impacts.

CR impacts.

LERF Cover Basin estimate, LAWPS Estimates and A/AX

FY19/20 plan could cause risk to be realized.

Alternatives (Staffing/Quality) Review results of estimate process and create path forward

Recovery Implementation Completion of a post mortem evaluation of a recent instance where actual costs diverged most significantly from the initial estimate.

Plan to do a mid/post review of FY 19/20 plan

WRPSC-0014-R: Workforce Confidence


Workforce incentive program

CPPO Vapors communications (ongoing)

Vapors Website (ongoing)

VPP (ongoing)

CVAP

Management has not received any negative feedback regarding WRPS hazard control strategies

Independent third party reviews for APR usage (ongoing)

Issues/Impacts Loss of workforce confidence could lead to higher attrition rates

UNCLASSIFIED




UNCLASSIFIED



Recovery Implementation Roundtable discussions

All hands meetings

CPPO Vapors communications (ongoing)

Vapors Website (ongoing)

WRPSC-0018-R: Funding Shortfalls Impact the Ability to Accomplish Mission Goals and Objectives


Maintain IPL / ranking database for all fiscal year scope. Utilize IPL to develop recommendations for scope offsets for emergent scopes including EM 45 day review initiatives.

Work with shareholders to make sure we do not encounter issues meeting regulatory agreements

Work with DOE to defer FY18 work scope into FY19.

Issues/Impacts Inability to complete work that may be necessary for milestones


Recovery Implementation Prepare work plan for FY 19/20 (ongoing)

Completed development and submittal of the FY18 work plan including carryover funding

WRPSC-0019-R: Anticipated Work scope impacted by Permitting Delays


Begin Permitting Early

Issues/Impacts None


Recovery Implementation None

UNCLASSIFIED




UNCLASSIFIED


Table 1-7: Current Risk Level Status

UNCLASSIFIED




UNCLASSIFIED


1.11.3 Inter-Entity Work Orders Inter Entity Work Order Variance Contribution:

The chart below represents the Inter Entity Work Orders (IEWOs). The IEWO actual costs are not included in the PMB reporting, resulting in a positive CV. Identified below are all

IEWOs scheduled, or anticipated, currently. Costs are maintained and reported consistent with the DOE Financial Management Handbook.

Table 1-8: IEWO

1.11.4 Comprehensive Vapor Action Plan (CVAP) Significant progress has been made to address the recommendations. As shown below, the status is that 54% of the deliverables addressing the recommendations are considered Complete

and closed. CPPO has validated that 67% of the recommendations have been addressed by actions/deliverable that are either Complete or Fieldwork Complete. Of the 369 total

recommendations:

54% have been verified Complete and are considered closed.

13% are verified as Fieldwork Complete and await final deliverables (i.e. documentation) to close.

33% have ongoing actions and are In Progress.

There are no recommendations Pending

UNCLASSIFIED




UNCLASSIFIED


Table 1-9: External Assessments Recommendations Status

1.11.5 Consent Decree

Table 1-10: Consent Decree – Quarterly Reporting *Task based Hours include employees for subcontractors to WRPS and does not include non-retrieval farms.

**Hours Include Engineering and Project Management accounts.

***Detrimental impacts are presented as the total number of calendar days in which a stop work related to SCBA use prevented field operations from continuing since Fiscal Month Apr16. It is limited to

SCBA stop works only and excludes vapor and weather impacts (i.e., AOP-15 events). The durations were based on entering and exiting stop works.

Validated

Complete

Field Work

CompleteIn Progress Pending

TVAT 88 8 21 - 117

OIG 3 - - - 3

NIOSH 23 11 20 - 54

EA-32 16 5 10 - 31

CTEH 17 3 3 - 23

VMEP I, II 23 9 35 - 67

Other 26 13 35 - 74

Totals 196 49 124 - 369

Report Total

Recommendations Status as of June 26, 2018

Documents

Project Manager’s Assessment · 2018. 12. 17. · Project Manager’s Assessment Safety and Health Through June 30, 2018, WRPS Tank Operations Contract (TOC) had worked 7,193,686