Wyden blocks DOE nominee over Hanford cleanup concerns
KTVZ.com
June 16, 2015
LINK
 
WASHINGTON - Sen. Ron Wyden, D- Ore., said Tuesday he will object to the Senate’s consideration of the Department of Energy’s nominee for Assistant Secretary of Energy for Environmental Management, in a hearing before the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee.
 
Wyden said he would hold up the full Senate proceeding to vote on the nomination of Monica C. Regalbuto until the Energy Department takes “concrete action” to address both the culture of hostility for workers at Hanford and the department’s failure to clean up even one gallon of high-level radioactive nuclear waste after 25 years and billions of dollars spent at the site.
 
“It is time for the culture of hostility against the whistleblowers at Hanford to end,” Wyden said. “Until I see corrective action – concrete action – from the Department of Energy to address both the whistleblower issue and the treatment of radioactive waste, I am going to be objecting to the Senate proceeding to the nomination of Dr. Regalbuto.
 
"This is not a judgment of her qualifications, as she is highly qualified to serve in that role, but rather an insistence that needed changes at Hanford cannot be put off any longer.”
 
During the hearing, Wyden expressed continued concern about the Energy Department’s management of the Hanford Nuclear site in southwest Washington state, including the way the department and its contractors have treated whistleblowers.
 
Two employees – Dr. Walt Tomasaitis and Donna Busche – were fired by department contractors after reporting safety concerns to the Secretary of Energy. At least two other Hanford contractors retaliated against employee whistleblowers, according to investigations by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration.
 
The hostile work environment at Hanford is having a chilling effect on employees at the site who might want to raise concerns, Wyden said. A report by DOE’s Office of Environment, Safety and Health Assessments last June found that only 30% of federal employees in the Office of River Protection, which oversees the high-level radioactive waste tanks and the Treatment Plant, felt that they could come forward and openly challenge a management decision.
 
In March, Wyden asked the Energy Department’s Inspector General Greg Friedman to investigate the activities of a department contractor, Bechtel National, Inc., after a company report showed that $277 million of taxpayer money has been spent on work orders that have not been completed at the Hanford Waste Treatment Plant.
 
Wyden has repeatedly called on the Department of Energy to improve oversight and safety practices at Hanford, starting with a law he wrote more than 20 years ago while in the House of Representatives that required the DOE to monitor risks of leaks from single-shelled storage tanks.
 
Wyden is a senior member of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee.
 
 
Two steps forward on US nuclear waste storage
The Hill
June 17, 2015
LINK
 
Tracing the U.S. government's development path for a long-term used nuclear fuel storage solution looks more like a stumbling stagger than a focused beeline, but with just two steps, the country now has a clear line of sight to meaningful progress.
 
The $27 billion stagger
 
More than 15 years after the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) was required by law to take title to commercial used nuclear fuel for long-term storage, used fuel remains scattered across the country at 75 operating and decommissioned reactor sites in 33 states. With the failure to create a central storage site, taxpayers have paid the price — to the tune of $4.5 billion — for the DOE's breach of contractual obligations to U.S. utilities. According to The National Law Journal, these taxpayer liabilities are expected to grow substantially in the coming years, estimated to top $27 billion if the DOE is unable to take title by 2021. To rectify this situation, the DOE must first have a location to consolidate and to manage used nuclear fuel.
 
As the history of this effort shows, safe and secure used nuclear fuel management is a political hurdle, not a technical one. Existing law provides for a single such location at Yucca Mountain in Nevada and limits the DOE from operating any federal consolidated storage facility until the Yucca Mountain site is available. To finance used nuclear fuel management, the law also provides for a Nuclear Waste Fund supplied by the ratepayers who directly benefit from nuclear-generated electricity. Despite the technical and safety evaluations that continue to affirm the suitability of Yucca Mountain as a permanent repository for used nuclear fuel and the availability of a dedicated funding mechanism, the politics of state and local consent have proved persistently thorny.
These struggles expose the lack of flexibility in our country's used nuclear fuel management system. Relying on a single-point-of-failure requirement, such as Yucca Mountain, has hobbled our progress toward achieving America's energy goals.
 
The first step to a solution
 
There is, however, a cost-effective, community-supported, near-term solution.
 
As the first step, Waste Control Specialists (WCS) announced its intent to file a license application with the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission to build and to operate a consolidated interim storage facility (CISF) by 2020, deploying existing technology at an existing community-approved location on its 14,000-acre site in Andrews County, Texas. This near-term private solution includes storage services and transportation for nuclear fuel from multiple locations in the United States, with a priority focus on fully decommissioned sites. WCS partnered with AREVA Inc. to license and to develop the facility, and subsequently, AREVA announced an agreement with NAC International for joint support of the project. Combined, AREVA and NAC represent the technology used at 62 percent of existing dry storage systems in the United States, including 80 percent of the systems at decommissioned sites. Both companies are also experienced global leaders in securely transporting nuclear materials.
 
At its Andrews County facility, WCS operates two separately licensed low-level radioactive waste (LLRW) disposal facilities, including the Texas Compact Disposal Facility — the only commercial compact facility built since Congress passed the Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Act more than 30 years ago. The WCS site is fully characterized for radioactive waste storage with the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ).
 
The next step
 
While WCS has not sought federal or state funding for licensing of the CISF, it will require clarity from Congress to move forward. WCS must be sure that the secretary of Energy can enter into contracts with private entities — as recommended by the president's Blue Ribbon Commission on America's Nuclear Future — to store used nuclear fuel and high-level waste, and to use the Nuclear Waste Fund for that purpose.
 
A few weeks ago, the Senate Appropriations Committee included corrections within its annual Energy and Water Development bill that provide necessary clarity for a private-storage initiative. Over the next two months, the authorizing committees in both the House and Senate will examine a range of actions to support effective used nuclear fuel management policies.
 
The availability of such a private-storage service would introduce much-needed flexibility to the U.S. nuclear fuel management system. It would enable more efficient management of used fuel, build confidence in the existing licensing and transportation processes, and protect taxpayers and ratepayers whose contributions have yet to be translated into meaningful action.
 
With these two steps, our country will again be on the right path for near-term delivery of a used nuclear fuel management capability that benefits all U.S. ratepayers and taxpayers.
 
McMahon is senior vice president and CISF (consolidated interim storage facility) project director of AREVA Inc., the leading nuclear energy supplier in the United States.
 
 
U.S. Energy Secretary calls for $1 billion annually for MOX program at Savannah River Site
The Augusta Chronicle
June 16, 2015
LINK
 
U.S. Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz said Tuesday it will take more than $1 billion a year to complete Savannah River Site’s mixed-oxide fuel fabrication facility and fund other related processes required for that method of plutonium disposal.
 
“When it comes to the total funding, not just for the fabrication plant but for all the other activities, for the (plutonium) pit disassembly and everything else, you’re talking north of a billion dollars a year,” Moniz said. “We’ve got to see Congress being willing to appropriate over a billion dollars a year for decades to get it done.”
 
Moniz said about $5 billion has been spent so far on MOX, which has cost overruns in the billions and years of schedule delays. The MOX fuel facility received $345 million for fiscal year 2015 to continue construction after the Obama administration recommended $221 million to stop the project and study cheaper alternatives. Level funding was proposed for next fiscal year.
 
“We are woefully short of the kind of resources that will take to get this project done in a reasonable time. The more time we go, the more it costs,” Moniz said during a media briefing near Aiken following a visit to SRS.
 
Moniz said completing MOX represents the best policy decision to make use of the $5 billion capital investment and fulfill a nonproliferation agreement with Russia.
 
Alternative plutonium disposition methods must be studied to determine the cost, and Congress must appropriate adequate funds, Moniz said. The administration recommended halting construction, or “cold standby,” until studies were finished so money would not be spent on a project with an unknown future, he said.
 
“It’s great to have a preference but if it’s not going to get paid for and it’s not going to get done, we’ve got to rethink what we’re doing. That’s where we remain,” Moniz said.
 
The MOX facility is intended to convert 34 metric tons of weapons-grade plutonium into commercial nuclear fuel. Construction began in 2007 with a $4.8 billion budget.
 
The project is about 65 percent complete, according to construction contractor CB&I Areva MOX Services.
 
Numerous cost estimates for the project have been done. A report ordered by Congress and released last month by the Aerospace Corp., a federally funded research and development center in California, determined the cost would total $110.4 billion when funded at $375 million a year. The estimate drops to $47.5 billion when funded at $500 million annually. The report’s accuracy was questioned by the contractor, Republican politicians and nuclear proponents.
 
Total costs will continue to escalate if the program is not fully funded each year, Moniz said. Additionally, the plant’s technology becomes outdated the longer construction takes to complete, he said.
 
“It will be finished if the resources are substantially higher than they are now. Otherwise, it will never be finished,” Moniz said.
 
 
MOX officials: ‘Recruitment is tough’
The Aiken Standard
June 16, 2015
LINK
 
Officials with a contractor company for the Savannah River Site’s MOX project said it is difficult to recruit and retain a workforce for the project with constant uncertainties looming in the federal budget.
  
Kelly Trice, senior vice president for nuclear construction within CB&I’s Power business unit, was scheduled to speak on MOX and other nuclear projects during a Tuesday breakfast hosted by Citizens for Nuclear Technology Awareness, or CNTA.
 
Trice was unable to attend, so the group received updates from Bobby Wilson, senior vice president of CB&I Project Services Group, and Mike Zustra, vice president for environmental health and safety.
 
The two discussed CB&I’s many projects in the area, including MOX and work at Plant Vogtle and the V.C. Summer Nuclear Station. After a slide show, the two talked about difficulties in keeping a workforce considering the tight budget around MOX and threats of shutting down the project.
 
“Recruitment is tough,” Wilson said. “It’s tough with the uncertainty of the budget, but it’s something we work at every day. We have a lot of good, devoted people in the area who work really hard, and it takes its toll when there’s cause for concern.”
 
Don Bridges, vice chairman of the nuclear group, also asked the two speakers how they deal with the cost overrun issues with MOX, a project that is a part of an effort to dispose of 34 metric tons of weapons-grade plutonium.
 
“The costs seem to be growing and generating bad press,” Bridges said.
 
Wilson said that often, the growing costs come from the engineering side of the project, rather than the actual construction.
 
“Sometimes, there are engineering delays that cause construction delays. That’s pretty much what you’re seeing going on,” Wilson said.
 
Wilson and Zustra also were asked about the congressionally mandated study on MOX conducted by Aerospace Corp. – a California-based nonprofit corporation that operates a federally funded research and development center.
 
The study estimated a $51 billion lifecycle cost for the MOX program.
 
Aerospace reported that the $51 billion-figure is based on whether MOX was to be funded at $500 million per year, closer to the level the Department of Energy has said it would take to make significant progress. If MOX was funded at $375 million per year – $30 million less than its current funding – Aerospace reported it would cost about $110 billion to complete.
 
Wilson and Zustra directed questions on the study to the Energy Department. However, Bryan Wilkes, a spokesperson for the group, said in April that the figures in the study don’t match up. Wilkes said it will take an additional $3.3 billion to finish the main MOX building with a projected lifecycle cost for the entire plutonium disposition targeted at under $20 billion.
 
“The biggest costs are going to be labor costs, and that’s how we can be certain in our estimates,” Wilkes said.
 
 
D&D completion delayed
Portsmouth Daily Times
June 16, 2015
LINK
 
Secretary of the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Ernest Moniz now says it will take until as late as 2052 to complete the cleanup work at the Portsmouth Gaseous Diffusion Plant at Piketon, obliterating the original 2024 completion date.
 
“The goal of 2024 is not achievable,” Moniz said. “The Department’s schedule range for completing cleanup of the site is 2044 to 2052 reflecting 50 percent and 80 percent confidence levels, respectively.”
 
The acknowledgement that the completion of cleanup work in Piketon will be delayed was made by Moniz in response to a question that Sen. Rob Portman sent to him following a February 2015 hearing on DOE’s budget request, held in the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee in February.
 
“Unbelievably, the Administration has now said the promised cleanup dollars won’t be there, jobs will be cut, and work in Piketon is not likely to be completed until 2052. While campaigning for president in 2008, Barack Obama made a promise to the community to prioritize the cleanup and prepare the site for reindustrialization as quickly as possible,” Portman said. “In 2009, then-Energy Secretary Chu announced a plan to accelerate completion of the cleanup work from 2044 to 2024. Now, after hundreds of millions in federal dollars have already been spent to accelerate the cleanup efforts, I am shocked to learn that the project was either severely mismanaged or the commitments made to the community were no more than empty promises. This is unacceptable, and I intend to hold this Administration accountable and stand up for the Ohioans they are leaving in a lurch. I will work with my colleagues in Congress to get this project back on track, and I again ask for the Administration’s full support.”
 
On Tuesday, Portman attended the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources’ nomination hearing for Dr. Monica Regalbuto to be Assistant Secretary of Energy (Environmental Management). If confirmed, Dr. Regalbuto will be in charge DOE’s Office of Environmental Management with oversees cleanup efforts at Piketon. Portman submitted questions to Dr. Regalbuto expressing concern over the Administration’s $49 million cut to cleanup funding in Fiscal Year 2016 and requesting a commitment from her that, if confirmed, she will develop a long-term plan for the cleanup efforts.
 
Earlier this year, Portman urged Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Director Shaun Donovan to fully fund decontamination and decommissioning operations in Piketon. Portman asked Moniz if he intends to continue the uranium barter program to subsidize the Portsmouth GDP cleanup funding while understanding that the stockpiles are limited.
 
“Yes,” Moniz responded, then told Portman the DOE has been pleased to provide his staff members with the information and promised to keep him informed of any new developments on the issue.
 
When Portman asked if the DOE will strengthen its presence in the community and at the Portsmouth site by opening a Piketon office, Moniz responded the DOE does not plan to open a Piketon office because it already has a well-staffed office located on the Portsmouth site.
 
When Portman pressed Moniz on the question of plans to continue the agreement with the Southern Ohio Diversification Initiative (SODI) to reuse or recycle assets from the site, Moniz said the DOE has been pleased to provide his (Portman) staff with the information and to keep him informed.
 
Portman previously secured the inclusion of additional funding authority in the Fiscal Year 2015 Continuing Resolution to fund cleanup activities at the Piketon site. The funding helped protect nearly 700 workers at the site who were at risk of being laid-off in October. Portman and U.S. Senator Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio) also called on DOE to provide answers regarding concerns over funding for the project, which currently employees 1,900 individuals.
 
Portman said in 2012 he also worked with the former Energy Secretary, Steven Chu, to increase the cap on the uranium barter program to help cover a gap in appropriated funding. The uranium barter program has allowed the DOE to barter or sell natural uranium into the open market and use the proceeds to pay for a portion of the cleanup work at Piketon.
 
A Fluor B&W Portsmouth official responded to the Daily Times that the company has no comment.
 
 
Always/Never: Sandia documentary tells story of nuclear weapons safety, security
Sandia Labs News Releases
June 15, 2015
LINK
 
Sandia National Laboratories’ documentary, Always/Never: The Quest for Safety, Control & Survivability, showcases rare historical footage and interviews with a wide range of experts to describe how national security laboratories improved the safety and security of nuclear weapons from the dawn of the nuclear age to the end of the Cold War.
 
After World War II, U.S. policymakers decided the nation would rely heavily on nuclear weapons as an essential strategic deterrent. At the same time, they wanted assurances that weapons in the stockpile would always work if called upon but would never detonate as the result of accident, equipment failure, human mistake or malicious intent — hence the title of the film.
 
Nuclear weapons must work in extremely complex and often harsh environments. While they could remain dormant for decades, they must be available immediately at the president’s command.
 
Always/Never by Sandia filmmaker Dan Curry documents Sandia’s crucial role with wide-ranging interviews that tell the story from many viewpoints, including the military, academics, other laboratories and those who oppose nuclear weapons. Among those interviewed are the late former Defense secretaries Robert McNamara and James Schlesinger; Bruce Blair, co-founder of Global Zero, which seeks to eliminate nuclear weapons; and Stanford University senior fellow Scott Sagan, author of The Limits of Safety: Organizations, Accidents, and Nuclear Weapons. More than a dozen active and retired Sandia designers and engineers also recount their stories for the camera, many for the first time publicly.
 
“We decided to place Sandia’s achievements alongside those of Los Alamos and Livermore national laboratories. Additionally, those achievements had to be placed in the context of a much larger historical framework, one shaped by NATO and U.S. policy and military operations, international politics and world events,” said Curry, who spent years gathering on-camera interviews with dozens of key players in nuclear policy.
 
Always/Never can be viewed on Sandia’s YouTube channel. Media representatives may obtain a DVD or request interviews with some of the subjects by contacting Sue Holmes at (505) 844-6362 or sholmes@sandia.gov.
 
The nuclear weapons history told in the film spans 1945-1991 and examines the geopolitical events of the Cold War and how those events drove the history of nuclear weapon design and engineering.
 
Always/Never tells the story of the push and pull between nuclear policy, technology and operations. While the Eisenhower administration shared nuclear weapons with NATO allies, for example, the Kennedy administration wanted greater assurance that they could be used only with presidential consent. Sandia developed Permission Action Links (PALs) as a practical solution to improve presidential control. PALS, as an engineered barrier to prevent an unauthorized person who obtained access to a nuclear weapon from being able to use it, made a major contribution to global security.
 
“It’s important to preserve this history for generations without the experience of living through WWII or the Cold War,” said Deputy Laboratories Director and Executive Vice President for National Security Programs Steve Rottler. “Exploring key aspects of the past interaction between technology, military requirements and national policy may contribute to a better understanding of what it will take to sustain the nation’s nuclear deterrent in an uncertain future. This film captures the history that drove the development of a science-based philosophy, set of principles and structured engineering approach for assuring the safety, security and reliability of U.S. nuclear weapons. Our commitment to the Always/Never paradigm still pervades Sandia today.”