ECA Update: March 5, 2014
Published: Wed, 03/05/14
|
Future uncertain for cleanup sites dependent upon WIPP
Current-Argus
March 5, 2014
CARLSBAD >> A month has passed since two accidents halted operations at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant, leaving the immediate future of waste cleanup sites scattered across the country in temporary limbo.
Many laboratories around the country depend on WIPP, located 26 miles east of Carlsbad, for the disposal of transuranic nuclear waste and both federal and state officials are weighing all options with no set date for resuming waste disposal.
"We are looking at other waste generator sites as options to minimize the effects from the stoppage at WIPP," said Brad Bugger, a DOE employee based at Idaho National Laboratory, who is in Carlsbad to assist with the ongoing radiation situation.
Many laboratories around the country depend on WIPP, located 26 miles east of Carlsbad, for the disposal of transuranic nuclear waste and both federal and state officials are weighing all options with no set date for resuming waste disposal.
"We are looking at other waste generator sites as options to minimize the effects from the stoppage at WIPP," said Brad Bugger, a DOE employee based at Idaho National Laboratory, who is in Carlsbad to assist with the ongoing radiation situation.
If WIPP can't reopen in time to hit the target cleanup dates for Los Alamos National Laboratory and other cleanup sites, Bugger said the federal government is discussing possible alternatives for the waste. He said he couldn't yet name potential alternative disposal sites, but added the DOE is still "committed to meeting the obligations."
LANL has shipped 3,160 cubic meters of waste to WIPP for disposal, exceeding its target for February. LANL must clean up a total of 3,706 cubic meters of waste by June 30 according to an agreement between the DOE and the State of New Mexico.
New Mexico Environment Department Secretary Ryan Flynn has been adamant that all waste be removed from LANL by the target date, referred to as "Campaign 3706," and voiced his frustration with the DOE's cleanup effort nearly two weeks ago during a WIPP news conference.
New Mexico Environment Department Secretary Ryan Flynn has been adamant that all waste be removed from LANL by the target date, referred to as "Campaign 3706," and voiced his frustration with the DOE's cleanup effort nearly two weeks ago during a WIPP news conference.
"Come hell or high water, we want that waste off the hill and I do not intend to renegotiate that deadline at this time," Flynn said on Feb. 20.
The remaining waste from LANL is currently stored in an outside dome in the city of Los Alamos and Flynn said on Tuesday that it is a potential public health hazard as long as the waste is not removed. The 2011 Las Conchas fire in Northern New Mexico threatened LANL and caused many residents to fear the possibility that the TRU waste could become a victim to the flames.
"It's been a dry winter and we're still on course for a severe drought ... waste removal would eliminate the risk," Flynn said. "I'm going to do everything in my power to make sure the campaign is a success."
The complications first began at WIPP on Feb. 5 when a salt hauler caught on fire underground in the facility's north mine, forcing immediate evacuations. Six employees were treated for smoke inhalation at Carlsbad Medical Center.
Operations remained halted at WIPP because of the ongoing fire investigation when a radiation leak was detected underground in south mine on Feb. 15. Airborne radiation with traces of plutonium and americium was later found approximately a half mile outside of the facility a few days later.
Thirteen employees at the nuclear waste repository were later found to have inhaled traces of americium in preliminary exams, according to information released by the DOE on Feb. 27.
WIPP had been receiving an average of 16 barrels of waste per week before transportation and disposal was discontinued due to the fire. Most of the waste WIPP had been receiving came from LANL, Idaho National Laboratory and Savannah River in South Carolina, according to DOE officials.
WIPP has received 43,005 cubic meters of waste from INL, 17,582 cubic meters from Savannah River Site and 5,060 cubic meters from the Hanford Site in Washington state according to Bugger.
LANL and INL are still processing, treating and packaging waste in an effort to stay on schedule to meet waste removal deadlines to Bugger.
The remaining waste from LANL is currently stored in an outside dome in the city of Los Alamos and Flynn said on Tuesday that it is a potential public health hazard as long as the waste is not removed. The 2011 Las Conchas fire in Northern New Mexico threatened LANL and caused many residents to fear the possibility that the TRU waste could become a victim to the flames.
"It's been a dry winter and we're still on course for a severe drought ... waste removal would eliminate the risk," Flynn said. "I'm going to do everything in my power to make sure the campaign is a success."
The complications first began at WIPP on Feb. 5 when a salt hauler caught on fire underground in the facility's north mine, forcing immediate evacuations. Six employees were treated for smoke inhalation at Carlsbad Medical Center.
Operations remained halted at WIPP because of the ongoing fire investigation when a radiation leak was detected underground in south mine on Feb. 15. Airborne radiation with traces of plutonium and americium was later found approximately a half mile outside of the facility a few days later.
Thirteen employees at the nuclear waste repository were later found to have inhaled traces of americium in preliminary exams, according to information released by the DOE on Feb. 27.
WIPP had been receiving an average of 16 barrels of waste per week before transportation and disposal was discontinued due to the fire. Most of the waste WIPP had been receiving came from LANL, Idaho National Laboratory and Savannah River in South Carolina, according to DOE officials.
WIPP has received 43,005 cubic meters of waste from INL, 17,582 cubic meters from Savannah River Site and 5,060 cubic meters from the Hanford Site in Washington state according to Bugger.
LANL and INL are still processing, treating and packaging waste in an effort to stay on schedule to meet waste removal deadlines to Bugger.
"It's still early to determine how much of an affect the non-shipping has on cleanup," said Susan Burke, the INL coordinator for the Idaho Department of Environmental Quality. "Overall I think the cleanup progress (at INL) has been very good. Most milestones have been met by DOE."
Burke said the state of Idaho has vaguely discussed potential contingency plans as well, but nothing concrete.
WIPP opened in 1999 and disposes transuranic waste, commonly referred to at "TRU," into the Permian-age salt bedrock 2,150 feet below ground. Most of the waste WIPP receives is primarily low-level, solid materials such as discarded tools and cloths used in the manufacturing of Cold War-era nuclear weapons.
Burke said the state of Idaho has vaguely discussed potential contingency plans as well, but nothing concrete.
WIPP opened in 1999 and disposes transuranic waste, commonly referred to at "TRU," into the Permian-age salt bedrock 2,150 feet below ground. Most of the waste WIPP receives is primarily low-level, solid materials such as discarded tools and cloths used in the manufacturing of Cold War-era nuclear weapons.
USEC files for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection in investor-approved plan
The Washington Post
March 5, 2014
Bethesda-based nuclear energy provider USEC filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection Wednesday after delays to a major centrifuge project and shifts in the global market made it impossible for the company to repay debt due later this year.
A majority of holders of the company's senior unsecured notes approved the bankruptcy plan, which was previously announced in December. The company expects to receive court approval and emerge from bankruptcy by this summer.
USEC chief executive John K. Welch said in a statement that the bankruptcy filing will allow the company to "pursue its ongoing business objectives with greater certainty" by strengthening its balance sheet.
The deal calls for the note holders to receive $200 million of new debt and 79 percent of the restructured company's common stock. Existing shareholders would receive 5 percent of the new common stock as part of the deal.
Toshiba Corp. and the Babcock & Wilcox Co. will each take on $20.2 million in debt and 8 percent of new common stock as part of the arrangement.
The company's management will remain in place following the bankruptcy, though its board of directors will be replaced, said spokesman Paul Jacobson.
USEC issued $530 million worth of notes in 2007 with the expectation it would repay that money by October of this year. In that time, an economic downturn and natural disaster have dramatically changed the global market for nuclear power, Jacobson said.
The company has been unable to secure a $2 billion loan guarantee and other funding necessary to complete its American Centrifuge Plant. The company had expected the uranium enrichment facility in Piketon, Ohio would be yielding revenue by this point, Jacobson said.
What's more, the earthquake and tsunami that took out a major nuclear reactor in Fukushima, Japan in March 2011 raised troubling questions about the safety of nuclear power and caused global prices for nuclear fuel to drop.
USEC ended last year with $314 million in cash on its balance sheet.
New budget for LANL does not include money for plutonium facility
The New Mexican
March 4, 2014
Nuclear security remains top dog in the Department of Energy's $27.9 billion budget request for 2015 released Tuesday, but what that means for Los Alamos National Laboratory's bottom line remains uncertain until details are released in a few days.
The Department of Energy budget covers renewable and fossil fuel energy programs, electric grid security, energy innovation, and protecting and maintaining the nation's nuclear arsenal.
Of the total department budget request, $11.9 billion is for the National Nuclear Security Administration's programs and administration, which cover the lion's share of Los Alamos National Laboratory funding each year. The NNSA is looking at ways to be more efficient, given problems with runaway costs on some of its nuclear weapons and stockpile projects, officials said during a news conference Tuesday.
All told, New Mexico received more than $4.6 billion in Department of Energy funding in fiscal year 2014, most of it for LANL and Sandia National Laboratories.
The complete breakdown of Department of Energy funding for 2015 by state, facility and program was not released Tuesday.
The bulk of the NNSA request -- $8.3 billion -- is for the weapons program, an increase over last year. An additional half-billion dollars are available for weapons activities through the Opportunities, Growth and Security Initiative, if it's approved by Congress.
Meanwhile, the administration asked for a 20 percent reduction in funding for nuclear nonproliferation, at $1.6 billion. A lot of the decrease is to temporarily suspend construction of a facility in Aiken, S.C., to process plutonium pits from old nuclear warheads into fuel for nuclear power plants. The facility is part of a plan to break down and process 34 metric tons of plutonium materials from Russia and the U.S.
Just one portion of the project has run $3 billion over budget, and the full life-cycle cost was projected at $30 billion.
Los Alamos National Laboratory was helping to break down the plutonium pits and converting them to plutonium oxide as feedstock for the Savannah plant. The lab was planning to process at least 10 metric tons by 2018, but that will be delayed. NNSA officials said they'll spend at least the next year reviewing the best way to process the plutonium.
Los Alamos National Laboratory also is the only site processing plutonium into new pits for nuclear warheads. The lab and NNSA have been trying for years to build a new facility for testing and making the pits. The lab has two main plutonium facilities, one that is aging and scheduled to be closed by 2019 and the other -- PF-4 -- needs work to make it safer.
The administration is looking at revamping the pit production program at the lab in three phases. The first phase in 2015 doesn't involve any new facility money, according to Don L. Cook, NNSA deputy administrator for defense programs. Any request for new funding to retool the existing Plutonium Facility 4 at the lab and potentially build small production modules would occur in 2016 in the third phase, he said.
Greg Mello of the watchdog Los Alamos Study Group said the Department of Energy budget and its impact on the lab is a reminder. "In New Mexico, it is a big mistake to depend on Cold War weapons programs as a prop for our economy, let alone as a source of growth," he said in a statement. "There just isn't going to be significant growth in those programs, ever, and eventually there will be decline in real terms."
The Department of Energy budget request reduces funding for environmental management to clean up legacy radioactive waste at LANL by $171 million. The department still is asking for more than $224 million to remediate or remove the waste, left over from the lab's founding era during the Manhattan Project and the Cold War.
The Energy Department has proposed reducing the environmental management budget by $695,000 for the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant in Carlsbad, in the news lately for evacuating employees and shutting down recently after the facility's first radioactive leak was detected.
The environmental management budget totals more than $5.5 billion to clean up 50 years worth of highly radioactive waste at more than 20 sites in the U.S. It is the largest such program in the world, according to the Department of Energy.
Other Department of Energy budget highlights:
-
$118 million requested for a new office of Environment, Health, Safety and Security, which is supposed to protect the safety of federal employees, contractors and communities near Department of Energy facilities and ensure documents pertaining to weapons of mass destruction are not released to the public.
-
$355 million for a new climate resilience fund.
-
$200 million for programs to modernize the electric grid.
-
$714 million for energy efficiency and renewable energy.
Obama's proposed budget threatens MOX project
Aiken Standard
March 5, 2014
Editor's note: This story will be followed up in Thursday's edition with the views of interest groups and Congressional leaders.
The MOX project currently under construction at the Savannah River Site could be put on a "cold stand-by" if Congress agrees to President Barack Obama's budget proposal.
The MOX project currently under construction at the Savannah River Site could be put on a "cold stand-by" if Congress agrees to President Barack Obama's budget proposal.
Obama's fiscal year 2015 budget proposal would essentially freeze funding for the MOX project, while officials explore less costly options.
"As part of an ongoing analysis of options to dispose of surplus plutonium, the budget provides funding to place the Mixed Oxide (MOX) Fuel Fabrication Facility in cold stand-by, while the NNSA (National Nuclear Security Administration) evaluates alternative plutonium disposition options that will achieve a safe and secure solution more quickly and cost-effectively," the budget states.
"As part of an ongoing analysis of options to dispose of surplus plutonium, the budget provides funding to place the Mixed Oxide (MOX) Fuel Fabrication Facility in cold stand-by, while the NNSA (National Nuclear Security Administration) evaluates alternative plutonium disposition options that will achieve a safe and secure solution more quickly and cost-effectively," the budget states.
During a live stream news conference, Department of Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz added that the Department will seek other options for the plutonium disposition program.
He added, "... We have a task force that has been working on this very hard for the last nine months. They are continuing to work with the contractors to see if we can find some other way of doing this to get a substantial cost reduction on the MOX path, but we are continuing to look at other pathways, as well."
He added, "... We have a task force that has been working on this very hard for the last nine months. They are continuing to work with the contractors to see if we can find some other way of doing this to get a substantial cost reduction on the MOX path, but we are continuing to look at other pathways, as well."
The NNSA held a news conference on Tuesday afternoon. During the conference call, officials said MOX cost overruns are due to the facility being the first of its kind, which caused funding dilemmas.
"We agree with the contractor's areas of cost growth," officials said. "But the cost has gotten way beyond what we can ask taxpayers to pay. Over the next 12 to 18 months, an analysis will be made to see if the facility is the best option, and we will still be working with the contractor on this issue."
Areva - a joint partner with MOX contractor Shaw Areva MOX Services - also has a stake in the project and released a statement expressing disapproval of the president's proposal.
"We are disappointed that after multiple direct negotiations with the Department of Energy to firm the construction cost and schedule, and after recently receiving additional construction funds and reprogrammed funds from Congress, the DOE calls for, in essence, a cessation of a previously approved program," officials wrote in the statement.
The MOX program currently employs about 1,600 workers.
The facility is designed to turn weapons-grade plutonium into nuclear reactor fuel.
Its work is part of a nonproliferation effort between the United States and Russia to dispose of weapons-grade plutonium.
"We are disappointed that after multiple direct negotiations with the Department of Energy to firm the construction cost and schedule, and after recently receiving additional construction funds and reprogrammed funds from Congress, the DOE calls for, in essence, a cessation of a previously approved program," officials wrote in the statement.
The MOX program currently employs about 1,600 workers.
The facility is designed to turn weapons-grade plutonium into nuclear reactor fuel.
Its work is part of a nonproliferation effort between the United States and Russia to dispose of weapons-grade plutonium.
The project has undergone cost overruns and delays. The GAO reported in June that the plant is $3 billion over budget, costing an estimated $7.7 billion.
Most recently, DOE revealed the results of a study last month that estimates the project could have a life-cycle cost of $30 billion to complete.
Obama Budget Plan Puts Controversial Plutonium-Conversion Facility on Hold
National Journal
March 4, 2014
The Obama administration is placing controversial plans to complete construction on a South Carolina facility that would convert nuclear weapon-usable plutonium into reactor fuel on hold as part of the fiscal 2015 budget plan it rolled out on Tuesday.
The facility, which is partially built, would convert plutonium into mixed-oxide fuel.
"A review of this approach has determined that the MOX fuel approach is significantly more expensive than planned and it is not viable within the FY 2015 funding levels," said a summary of the Energy Department budget proposal, released by the White House.
"The Department of Energy is developing alternative approaches to plutonium disposition and will engage with stakeholder to determine a viable alternative," the statement continued. "As a result, the MOX project will be placed in cold standby while an alternative approach is determined."
The announcement comes on the heels of a Nuclear Regulatory Commission licensing board decision to uphold security plans for the controversial facility. It also follows new reports last month on the project's escalating costs.
Watchdog groups are already praising the announcement.
"Converting this plutonium to a form that would be harder to steal or reuse in nuclear weapons is an essential long-term goal," Edwin Lyman, a senior scientist with the Union of Concerned Scientists' global security program, said in a Tuesday statement. "But the MOX strategy would have greatly increased near-term risks by making it easier for terrorists to steal plutonium during processing transport or storage at reactors."
Activists have argued that solidifying the plutonium in a glass-like form could be cheaper and less vulnerable to theft.
The plutonium disposition effort is part of the National Nuclear Security Administration's broader nonproliferation program. In total, the administration is proposing that the semiautonomous Energy Department agency spend $1.6 billion on nonproliferation efforts in fiscal 2015. This would be a 20 percent drop from the $1.9 billon Congress approved for fiscal 2014, which in turn was a $289 million cut from fiscal 2013 levels.
Within the nonproliferation budget, the Obama administration is proposing a 24 percent cut to the Global Threat Reduction Initiative, which aims to secure vulnerable nuclear materials around the world.
"The reduction in FY 2015 funding reflects the expected completion of a major milestone in early FY 2015 of the development of a new domestic, non-[highly enriched uranium]-based supply of the critical medical isotope molybdenum-99 ... which is being executed under multiyear contracts funded in previous fiscal years," according to a summary.
The administration is also proposing a 24 percent cut to its International Material Protection and Cooperation program, which works to secure and eliminate vulnerable nuclear weapons and materials. It attributes this in part to the expiration of the longstanding Cooperative Threat Reduction umbrella agreement with Russia last year.
At the same time, it is recommending $8.3 billion for the agency's nuclear weapons programs, which is $533 million -- or 6.9 percent -- more than Congress approved for fiscal 2014. Among the items contributing to the increase is a requested boost to funds for the controversial refurbishment of the B-61 gravity bomb, according to the summary.
The news about the MOX program comes as the Nuclear Regulatory Commission licensing board has rejected activists' claims that plans for the facility do not include adequate security measures.
Shaw AREVA MOX Services -- the federal contractor that is building the facility in question -- praised the NRC panel's ruling. Watchdog groups, meanwhile, are critical of the decision, arguing it could set a bad precedent regarding how sensitive nuclear materials are handled generally.
The timing makes the debate yet more politically relevant, coming less than a month before an international Nuclear Security Summit takes place in the Netherlands.
The groups -- including the Union of Concerned Scientists, Nuclear Watch South and the Blue Ridge Environmental Defense League -- argued in their unsuccessful legal challenge that the contractor's plan relied too much on computers -- and not enough on humans -- to verify that the weapons-grade plutonium was accounted for and secure. They claimed the approach could make the facility vulnerable to theft and cyber-attack.
The NRC Atomic Safety and Licensing Board ruled last week that the contractor's plan was in compliance with the commission's regulations, however. The commission has yet to release the ruling, as its Office of Nuclear Security and Incident Response is reviewing the document to determine whether any "security--related information ... must be withheld," according to a Feb. 27 announcement.
Shaw AREVA MOX Services voiced its support for the ruling in a March 3 statement.
"We are very pleased with the licensing board's decision, which upholds the conclusion that the MOX facility meets the NRC's regulations for nuclear material control and accounting," said Kelly Trice, the company's president. "Safety and security are top priorities in the design, construction and operation of the MOX facility."
The company noted that NRC technical staff had concluded previously that its plan would not pose an undue risk to worker safety and health in a 2010 report. The five-member, presidentially-appointed commission itself has yet to make a final decision on licensing the MOX facility.
Lyman, the UCS senior scientist, said he remained convinced that the company's plan "is deeply deficient and [that the firm] is simply incapable of security and accounting for this incredibly dangerous material.
"The initial decision to grant this facility an operating license, allowing it to take possession of at least 34 tons of U.S. surplus plutonium, is reckless and will increase the risk that terrorists will be able to acquire enough plutonium to build a nuclear bomb without detection," Lyman said in a Feb. 27 statement.
Lyman told Global Security Newswire this week that he feared the licensing board's decision sets a bad precedent heading into the upcoming Nuclear Security Summit.
"I fear this will send the wrong signal to other countries that operate or plan to build bulk handling facilities for special nuclear material, like France, Japan, the U.K., India, China, and most notably, Russia -- which is supposed to be developing a plutonium disposition program in parallel," he said.
Lyman was referring to the agreement between the United States and Russia to dispose of surplus weapons grade material from the Cold War. The United States opted to uphold its end of the bargain by building the MOX facility, but the Obama administration may now be considering other options, due to the Energy Department program's rising costs.
Among the aspects of the MOX the security plan that worry Lyman are "claims that computer programs used to track the plant's inventory for ordinary business purposes can do double-duty to accurately account for plutonium items for national security purposes, eliminating the need for people to physically access and inspect the item," Lyman said in Feb. 28 statement released by Nuclear Watch South.
"Given the vulnerability of computer systems to manipulation by adversaries, this data can be corrupted," Lyman said. "There is no substitute for direct physical checks."
Shaw AREVA disputed Lyman's claims in a legal brief last year. While activists "frequently refer to the [computer] systems as 'substitute[s]' or a second best choice for what they refer to as 'physical retrieval and inspection,'" they "have not articulated precisely what they mean by 'physical retrieval and inspection'" during closed-door hearings, the May 3, 2013, brief said.
The activists' "suggestion that [the company's] proposed approach is second best is plainly incorrect, given the extensive testimony on the automation, reliability and reduction of opportunities for human effort provided by" the system, the company said.
$335M requested for UPF in 2015
Frank Munger's Atomic City Underground
March 4, 2014
Most of the U.S. Department of Energy's Oak Ridge programs appear to be well funded in the Obama administration's proposed budget for Fiscal Year 2015, according budget information released Tuesday.
Next year's budget request includes $335 million for work on the Uranium Processing Facility, which is considered the key to modernization of production capabilities at the Y-12 nuclear weapons plant.
That spending level, if approved by Congress, would actually be an increase over the current year's funding for UPF, which has been variously stated at $309 million and $326 million.
The funding request for UPF may be a little surprising to some because of the current uncertainty in the project's direction.
Bruce Held, acting administrator of the National Nuclear Security Administration, recently authorized a so-called Red Team -- headed by Oak Ridge National Laboratory Director Thom Mason -- to explore possible alternatives to the UPF.
The UPF was envisioned originally as an all-inclusive facility that would house all of the plant's uranium missions and warhead work. But growing cost projections and concerns about the project's lengthening schedule seemed to have changed the approach.
The hope now is find other, affordable options that would allow Y-12 to get out of antiquated uranium facilities sooner rather than later. Held has said he wants to be able to vacate the World War II-era 9212 complex by 2025 and cap the project's cost at $6.5 billion.
One of the possibilities could be use of a modular approach, similar to what Los Alamos National Laboratory has adopted for modernizing its plutonium operations. That could allow some of Y-12's uranium activities to be modernized in a shorter time frame.
During a teleconference call with reporters, NNSA officials were asked how they were able to set a funding level for UPF work in 2015 when the project's direction is subject to change.
Bob Raines, associate administrator for acquisition and project management, said much of the work taking place on the Uranium Processing Facility involves early technology development, design activities and seismic and safety studies that would be needed regardless of the Red Team's findings and recommendations.
That helped officials determine the appropriate amount of money for UPF next year, he said.
The overall funding request for Y-12 in Fiscal Year 2015 is $1.16 billion, which is roughly the same as this year's budget.
There was no detailed information available on funding for Oak Ridge National Laboratory, but the administration requested more than $5 billion for the Department of Energy's Office of Science -- which is the chief funding source of ORNL. That's a slight increase over the current spending on science, and that generally bodes well for the Oak Ridge lab.
In his news briefing Tuesday, Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz praised some of the science and energy research taking place at the national laboratories. He singled out the nuclear simulation hub at ORNL that's using advanced computing and simulation technologies to create virtual nuclear reactors that can be studied, with the results applied to today's operating reactors to make them more efficient.
Moniz said the project -- the Consortium for Advanced Simulation of Light Water Reactors -- has been "extremely successful" and would be funded again in 2015.
One potential down side for Oak Ridge is reduced spending on environmental cleanup.
According to the budget documents released Tuesday, DOE's cleanup program in Oak Ridge would get about $385 million in funding next year. That's a significant drop from the current spending level of nearly $430 million.
Mark Whitney, DOE's environmental manager in Oak Ridge, said the budget request would provide enough resources to "continue making progress" on cleanup activities and allow DOE to meet its legally enforceable cleanup milestones in 2015.
The budget documents said the Oak Ridge environmental funds would be used for design of a mercury-cleanup facility at the Y-12 nuclear weapons plant, as well as additional studies of mercury contamination at the site. The federal funding also would be used for construction of a new facility to treat highly radioactive sludges at the Oak Ridge Transuranic Waste Processing Center and support efforts to dispose of the uranium-233 stockpile at Oak Ridge National Laboratory.
Next year's budget request includes $335 million for work on the Uranium Processing Facility, which is considered the key to modernization of production capabilities at the Y-12 nuclear weapons plant.
That spending level, if approved by Congress, would actually be an increase over the current year's funding for UPF, which has been variously stated at $309 million and $326 million.
The funding request for UPF may be a little surprising to some because of the current uncertainty in the project's direction.
Bruce Held, acting administrator of the National Nuclear Security Administration, recently authorized a so-called Red Team -- headed by Oak Ridge National Laboratory Director Thom Mason -- to explore possible alternatives to the UPF.
The UPF was envisioned originally as an all-inclusive facility that would house all of the plant's uranium missions and warhead work. But growing cost projections and concerns about the project's lengthening schedule seemed to have changed the approach.
The hope now is find other, affordable options that would allow Y-12 to get out of antiquated uranium facilities sooner rather than later. Held has said he wants to be able to vacate the World War II-era 9212 complex by 2025 and cap the project's cost at $6.5 billion.
One of the possibilities could be use of a modular approach, similar to what Los Alamos National Laboratory has adopted for modernizing its plutonium operations. That could allow some of Y-12's uranium activities to be modernized in a shorter time frame.
During a teleconference call with reporters, NNSA officials were asked how they were able to set a funding level for UPF work in 2015 when the project's direction is subject to change.
Bob Raines, associate administrator for acquisition and project management, said much of the work taking place on the Uranium Processing Facility involves early technology development, design activities and seismic and safety studies that would be needed regardless of the Red Team's findings and recommendations.
That helped officials determine the appropriate amount of money for UPF next year, he said.
The overall funding request for Y-12 in Fiscal Year 2015 is $1.16 billion, which is roughly the same as this year's budget.
There was no detailed information available on funding for Oak Ridge National Laboratory, but the administration requested more than $5 billion for the Department of Energy's Office of Science -- which is the chief funding source of ORNL. That's a slight increase over the current spending on science, and that generally bodes well for the Oak Ridge lab.
In his news briefing Tuesday, Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz praised some of the science and energy research taking place at the national laboratories. He singled out the nuclear simulation hub at ORNL that's using advanced computing and simulation technologies to create virtual nuclear reactors that can be studied, with the results applied to today's operating reactors to make them more efficient.
Moniz said the project -- the Consortium for Advanced Simulation of Light Water Reactors -- has been "extremely successful" and would be funded again in 2015.
One potential down side for Oak Ridge is reduced spending on environmental cleanup.
According to the budget documents released Tuesday, DOE's cleanup program in Oak Ridge would get about $385 million in funding next year. That's a significant drop from the current spending level of nearly $430 million.
Mark Whitney, DOE's environmental manager in Oak Ridge, said the budget request would provide enough resources to "continue making progress" on cleanup activities and allow DOE to meet its legally enforceable cleanup milestones in 2015.
The budget documents said the Oak Ridge environmental funds would be used for design of a mercury-cleanup facility at the Y-12 nuclear weapons plant, as well as additional studies of mercury contamination at the site. The federal funding also would be used for construction of a new facility to treat highly radioactive sludges at the Oak Ridge Transuranic Waste Processing Center and support efforts to dispose of the uranium-233 stockpile at Oak Ridge National Laboratory.
Feds allocate $102 million for cleanup at Paducah nuclear plant
The Associated Press
February 15, 2014
PADUCAH, Kentucky -- A U.S. Department of Energy contractor will add jobs to help cleanup operations at the Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant.
The department allocated $102 million to LATA Kentucky for the fiscal year, which ends Sept. 30. The money came as part of a $324 million total allocation for the cleanup.
LATA spokesman Joe Walker told The Paducah Sun (http://bit.ly/1f4GI4N ) the funds will allow for the hiring of up to 95 people over the coming months
LATA will use its portion of the money primarily for the continued cleanup and eventual demolition of the C-410 Feed Plant, which was used to produce uranium hexafluoride from 1957 to 1977.
The funding will allow for the rehiring of some of the workers LATA Kentucky was forced to lay off late last year.
Energy budget would boost basic research, weapons maintenance
The Washington Post
March 4, 2014
President Obama's proposed budget asks for $27.9 billion in discretionary spending, a 2.6 percent increase, for the Energy Department, featuring boosts in spending on basic research and costs associated with maintaining the nation's nuclear weapons stockpile.
The administration is asking for $627 million in additional funds, a third more than the current fiscal year, for managing the nuclear stockpile. Overall the proposed budget includes $11.7 billion for nuclear security, a 4 percent increase over the 2014 enacted level.
The administration is asking for $627 million in additional funds, a third more than the current fiscal year, for managing the nuclear stockpile. Overall the proposed budget includes $11.7 billion for nuclear security, a 4 percent increase over the 2014 enacted level.
The Energy Department would also get: additional funds to clean up nuclear materials at the Hanford site in the state of Washington where research into nuclear weapons took place; a $127 million, or 34 percent, increase in spending on nuclear fusion to cover U.S. funds for ITER, an international project; a $52 million or 31 percent increase of Advanced Research Projects Agency - Energy, or ARPA-E as it is commonly known.
In one major reversal, the Energy Department budget proposal said it would place the mixed oxide (MOX) fuel fabrication facility in South Carolina into "cold standby." The government has spent about $5 billion on this project, which would attempt to convert surplus weapons' plutonium into commercial reactor fuel. It would have to spend much more than that to complete the project, which critics said would increase terrorism or accident risks.
Separately, Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.) said she was disappointed that the funding requested for all Hanford-related cleanup operations fell about $67 million short of the $2.15 billion appropriated in the current year.
In one major reversal, the Energy Department budget proposal said it would place the mixed oxide (MOX) fuel fabrication facility in South Carolina into "cold standby." The government has spent about $5 billion on this project, which would attempt to convert surplus weapons' plutonium into commercial reactor fuel. It would have to spend much more than that to complete the project, which critics said would increase terrorism or accident risks.
Separately, Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.) said she was disappointed that the funding requested for all Hanford-related cleanup operations fell about $67 million short of the $2.15 billion appropriated in the current year.
$0 for Yucca Mountain included in Obama's budget proposal
Las Vegas Sun
March 4, 2014
In his budget proposal, Obama reiterates a stand on Yucca Mountain that comes as reassurance to anti-dumpsite Nevadans, especially after a year in which the federal courts sided with those who want to keep the development going.
The budget puts $79 million toward research and development in the areas of transportation, storage, disposal and consent-based siting of a nuclear waste repository "after determining that Yucca Mountain was not a workable solution for disposing of the nation's spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive waste."
The budget puts $79 million toward research and development in the areas of transportation, storage, disposal and consent-based siting of a nuclear waste repository "after determining that Yucca Mountain was not a workable solution for disposing of the nation's spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive waste."
McCain: no global warming action until the left supports nuclear power
The Daily Caller
March 3, 2014
Arizona Republican Sen. John McCain said that while he believes global warming is an issue, he won't make any legislative moves until the left agrees on "certain fundamentals," including support for nuclear power.
"But I try to get involved in issues were I see a legislative result," McCain told Time magazine in a wide-ranging interview. "But there's going to be no movement in the Congress of the United States certainly this year and probably next year."
"So I just leave the issue alone because I don't see a way through it, and there are certain fundamentals, for example nuke power, that people on the left will never agree with me on," McCain said. "So why should I waste my time when I know the people on the left are going to reject nuclear power?"
"But I try to get involved in issues were I see a legislative result," McCain told Time magazine in a wide-ranging interview. "But there's going to be no movement in the Congress of the United States certainly this year and probably next year."
"So I just leave the issue alone because I don't see a way through it, and there are certain fundamentals, for example nuke power, that people on the left will never agree with me on," McCain said. "So why should I waste my time when I know the people on the left are going to reject nuclear power?"
Nuclear power has been a sensitive issue for Democrats, many of whom want to address global warming but also have concerns about nuclear waste. But nuclear plants offer a source of abundant electricity with little to no carbon dioxide emissions.
"I don't believe that you can really succeed in reducing greenhouse gases unless you have a lot of nuclear power plants," he added. "They're against them. Well, okay, I move on to other issues."
Many Democrats have long been opposed to nuclear plants because of the issue of storing nuclear waste. The Obama administration blocked efforts to store nuclear waste at Nevada's Yucca Mountain in 2010. One year later, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission stopped reviewing the Energy Department's license application for the Yucca Mountain project.
When Democrats controlled the House in 2010, they blocked a bipartisan amendment aimed at keeping Yucca Mountain as the nation's high-level nuclear waste repository.
"This was a bipartisan amendment aimed at ensuring that defense nuclear wastes are not stranded in our states indefinitely and are instead safely stored in the scientifically-proven national repository at Yucca Mountain," said Washington Republican Rep. Doc Hastings, who co-authored the amendment. "House Democrats refusal to even allow a vote on our amendment has resulted in a lost opportunity to keep Yucca Mountain moving forward."
"I don't believe that you can really succeed in reducing greenhouse gases unless you have a lot of nuclear power plants," he added. "They're against them. Well, okay, I move on to other issues."
Many Democrats have long been opposed to nuclear plants because of the issue of storing nuclear waste. The Obama administration blocked efforts to store nuclear waste at Nevada's Yucca Mountain in 2010. One year later, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission stopped reviewing the Energy Department's license application for the Yucca Mountain project.
When Democrats controlled the House in 2010, they blocked a bipartisan amendment aimed at keeping Yucca Mountain as the nation's high-level nuclear waste repository.
"This was a bipartisan amendment aimed at ensuring that defense nuclear wastes are not stranded in our states indefinitely and are instead safely stored in the scientifically-proven national repository at Yucca Mountain," said Washington Republican Rep. Doc Hastings, who co-authored the amendment. "House Democrats refusal to even allow a vote on our amendment has resulted in a lost opportunity to keep Yucca Mountain moving forward."
Environmentalists have also staunchly opposed nuclear power. But recent realizations of nuclear power's alleged climate benefits have made some environmentalists and even climate scientists push for more of the fuel source.
Last year, prominent scientists released an open letter to world leaders, urging the expansion of nuclear power use.
"Renewables like wind and solar and biomass will certainly play roles in a future energy economy, but those energy sources cannot scale up fast enough to deliver cheap and reliable power at the scale the global economy requires," wrote several prominent scientists, including former NASA scientist and climate activist James Hansen.
"While it may be theoretically possible to stabilize the climate without nuclear power, in the real world there is no credible path to climate stabilization that does not include a substantial role for nuclear power," the scientists wrote.
The documentary "Pandora's Promise" further delved into the nuclear power issue, concluding that nukes were the only way to cheaply generate the massive amounts of electricity needed to sustain modern life in a climate-friendly way. The documentary blames the anti-nuclear movement in the U.S. on baseless fears from disasters like Chernobyl and Three Mile Island.
But prominent environmental groups have rejected the nuclear power solution to global warming, arguing that it's a low-carbon fuel that comes with high risks and potential environmental costs.
"I don't think it's very significant that a few people have changed their minds about nuclear power," Ralph Cavanagh of the Natural Resources Defense Council told CNN, adding that the documentary "attempts to establish the proposition that mainstream environmentalists are pouring into nuclear advocacy today. They aren't. I've been in the NRDC since 1979. I have a pretty good idea of where the mainstream environmental groups are and have been. I've seen no movement."
Last year, prominent scientists released an open letter to world leaders, urging the expansion of nuclear power use.
"Renewables like wind and solar and biomass will certainly play roles in a future energy economy, but those energy sources cannot scale up fast enough to deliver cheap and reliable power at the scale the global economy requires," wrote several prominent scientists, including former NASA scientist and climate activist James Hansen.
"While it may be theoretically possible to stabilize the climate without nuclear power, in the real world there is no credible path to climate stabilization that does not include a substantial role for nuclear power," the scientists wrote.
The documentary "Pandora's Promise" further delved into the nuclear power issue, concluding that nukes were the only way to cheaply generate the massive amounts of electricity needed to sustain modern life in a climate-friendly way. The documentary blames the anti-nuclear movement in the U.S. on baseless fears from disasters like Chernobyl and Three Mile Island.
But prominent environmental groups have rejected the nuclear power solution to global warming, arguing that it's a low-carbon fuel that comes with high risks and potential environmental costs.
"I don't think it's very significant that a few people have changed their minds about nuclear power," Ralph Cavanagh of the Natural Resources Defense Council told CNN, adding that the documentary "attempts to establish the proposition that mainstream environmentalists are pouring into nuclear advocacy today. They aren't. I've been in the NRDC since 1979. I have a pretty good idea of where the mainstream environmental groups are and have been. I've seen no movement."
DOE awards contract to small business for mercury project at Y-12
Oak Ridge Today
March 1, 2014
The U.S. Department of Energy's Oak Ridge Office of Environmental Management, or EM, awarded the task order to Strata-G in Knoxville on Wednesday. The company will collect data and perform characterization at Outfall 200 at Y-12.
The task order is the first project in a five-year, multi-phase contract estimated at $15 million, DOE said in a press release Friday. The contract uses a bidding process among three small businesses for various characterization projects at EM's cleanup sites in Oak Ridge.
Under the task order, Strata-G will collect data about the soil and existing structures in the Outfall 200 area and provide a Sampling and Analysis Plan to DOE by July 2014, the press release said. These documents will help DOE's EM program determine the number and location of samples and the appropriate removal and disposal actions when cleanup activities begin. Additionally, the contractor will develop a plan to determine the geotechnical properties of the area to aid the design of the mercury water treatment facility. DOE will use this data on soil types and the depth of bedrock to develop the final design for the structure.
"Today's announcement is a two-fold accomplishment for our program," said Mark Whitney, manager of the Oak Ridge Office of EM. "We've initiated field work for an important project in Oak Ridge, and utilized small business to help us achieve our goals."
Outfall 200 is a crucial element in EM's cleanup strategy because several major storm water discharges converge at this location. For this reason, EM selected the site for its mercury water treatment facility. Construction is scheduled to begin in 2017. When operational, the facility will be able to process 3,000 gallons per minute to reduce offsite mercury migration, especially during future demolition projects.
The task order is the first project in a five-year, multi-phase contract estimated at $15 million, DOE said in a press release Friday. The contract uses a bidding process among three small businesses for various characterization projects at EM's cleanup sites in Oak Ridge.
Under the task order, Strata-G will collect data about the soil and existing structures in the Outfall 200 area and provide a Sampling and Analysis Plan to DOE by July 2014, the press release said. These documents will help DOE's EM program determine the number and location of samples and the appropriate removal and disposal actions when cleanup activities begin. Additionally, the contractor will develop a plan to determine the geotechnical properties of the area to aid the design of the mercury water treatment facility. DOE will use this data on soil types and the depth of bedrock to develop the final design for the structure.
"Today's announcement is a two-fold accomplishment for our program," said Mark Whitney, manager of the Oak Ridge Office of EM. "We've initiated field work for an important project in Oak Ridge, and utilized small business to help us achieve our goals."
Outfall 200 is a crucial element in EM's cleanup strategy because several major storm water discharges converge at this location. For this reason, EM selected the site for its mercury water treatment facility. Construction is scheduled to begin in 2017. When operational, the facility will be able to process 3,000 gallons per minute to reduce offsite mercury migration, especially during future demolition projects.
 |
|
More Information |
|
To help ensure that you receive all email with images correctly displayed, please add ecabulletin@aweber.com to your address book or contact list |
|
to the ECA Email Server |
|
If you have trouble viewing this email, view the online version |