[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 38 (Friday, February 25, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-4220]


[[Page Unknown]]

[Federal Register: February 25, 1994]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEFENSE NUCLEAR FACILITIES SAFETY BOARD

 

Resolution of Potential Conflict of Interest

    The Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board (Board) has identified 
and resolved a potential conflict of interest situation related to its 
contractor, MPR Associates, Incorporated (MPR). This notice, which is a 
summary of the facts related to this decision, satisfies the 
requirements of 10 CFR 1706.8(e) with respect to publication in the 
Federal Register. Under the Board's Organizational and Consultant 
Conflicts of Interests Regulation, 10 CFR part 1706 (OCI Regulations), 
an organizational or consultant conflict of interest (OCI) means that 
because of other past, present or future planned activities or 
relationships, a contractor or consultant is unable, or potentially 
unable, to render impartial assistance or advice to the Board, or the 
objectivity of such offeror or contractor in performing work for the 
Board is or might be otherwise impaired, or such offeror or contractor 
has or would have an unfair competitive advantage. While the OCI 
Regulations provide that contracts shall generally not be awarded to an 
organization where the Board has determined that an actual or potential 
OCI exists and cannot be avoided, the Board may waive this requirement 
in certain circumstances.
    The Board was advised of a potential safety issue at the Department 
of Energy's (DOE) Savannah River Site (SRS) regarding a tank containing 
Curium and Americium in a nitric acid solution. Specifically, sampling 
of the tank, which is 10 feet in diameter by 11 feet in height, and is 
made of Type 304 L stainless steel, demonstrated a high concentration 
of iron in the tank's contents, indicative of corrosion of the tank's 
stainless steel structure. Based on a standard calculational method for 
determining corrosion, DOE's Management and Operating contractor for 
SRS reached a preliminary conclusion that corrosion of the tank's 
stainless steel structure had resulted in a uniform wall thickness 
reduction of 0.011 inches from an original thickness of 0.5 inches. The 
Board was concerned that the corrosion might potentially be nonuniform 
or localized in areas of the tank such as crevices, or welds, and under 
sludge. The primary question was whether the extent of corrosion had 
the potential to breach the integrity of the tank, thereby increasing 
the probability of a release of radioactive material, threatening site 
workers and the general public's health and safety. Consequently, the 
Board determined that the accuracy of the analysis of the tank needed 
to be verified through the collection and evaluation of additional data 
to determine the degree of the corrosion problem and whether the tank's 
integrity is intact.
    As the Board did not have expertise readily available to conduct an 
in-depth evaluation of these findings, the Board decided to engage 
outside technical experts from MPR based on their extensive relevant 
experience, expertise, and immediate availability. However, MPR advised 
the Board that it had entered into a contractual relationship with a 
DOE contractor to provide assistance to DOE in the analysis of 
deactivation plans for the PUREX Plant, a DOE facility at the Hanford 
Reservation in Richland, Washington, and provide written 
recommendations and advice to DOE regarding these analyses. While MPR's 
contractual work for the Board and the DOE would not necessarily create 
an actual overlap of work at this time, and hence no direct OCI, a 
potential OCI would exist due to MPR's concurrent relationships with 
DOE and the Board, as the PUREX plant is a defense nuclear facility 
under the Board's jurisdiction. Consequently, as a result of its 
relationship with DOE, the ability of MPR to provide objective advice 
to the Board could be questioned.
    After considering these concerns, the Board concluded that the 
award of the task to MPR for a review of the tank in question at SRS 
was in the best interest of the Government and that a waiver of any OCI 
arising from the relationship described above, and the pertinent 
provisions of the OCI Regulations, was warranted. The reasons 
underlying these conclusions were as follows:
    1. MPR possessed extensive relevant technical expertise gained from 
previous long-term work on similar problems with the commercial nuclear 
industry and through performance of safety-related activities at SRS 
for the Board. The Board did consider whether there was a source other 
than MPR that had the caliber of qualified staff capable to responding 
to the Board's needs without having potential OCI situations. However, 
without exhaustive research, which would have caused unwarranted delay, 
the Board was not aware of any other firm with the level of background 
knowledge and experience of MPR, which is essential to the successful 
accomplishment of the Board's requirement.
    2. MPR advised the Board's staff that the expected revenues from 
its work related to the PUREX Plant at the Hanford Reservation in 
Richland, Washington, represented less than one percent of its total 
revenues. In the Board's view, such a low percentage of revenues from 
DOE-related projects should not make MPR financially dependent on DOE.
    3. In an attempt to mitigate any potential OCI related to this 
situation, MPR agreed to create an internal partition between MPR staff 
working on the Board project and MPR staff working on the DOE-related 
project. Further, MPR's efforts for the Board will be overseen by 
experienced technical staff of the Board to ensure that all resultant 
work products are impartial and contain full support for any findings 
and recommendations issued thereunder.
    Accordingly, on the basis of the determinations described above and 
pursuant to the applicable provisions of 10 CFR part 1706, the Chariman 
of the Board granted a waiver of any conflicts of interests (and the 
pertinent provisions of the OCI Regulations) with the Board's contract 
with MPR that might arise out of its existing contractual arrangement 
with a DOE contractor.

    Dated: February 18, 1994.
Kenneth M. Pusateri,
General Manager.
[FR Doc. 94-4220 Filed 2-24-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6820-KD-M