Defense Authorization Bill to Wait Until Lame-Duck Session
ECA

 

CQ reports that senior Senate aides say the Senate will not take up the Fiscal Year 2013 National Defense Authorization Act (S. 3254) until the lame-duck session that follows the November 2012 elections. The annual defense policy bill authorizes national security energy programs.

 

The aides say there is not enough time to work on the bill while also addressing defense policy issues in the six-month continuing resolution slated for passage in September 2012.

 

Top Senate Republican Says Lame Duck Solutions Unlikely
Chris Frates, National Journal
August 31, 2012

LINK

 

What was once shaping up to be an epic lame duck session chock full of tough decisions is increasingly looking like another kick-the-can-down-the-road show as lawmakers acknowledge that the nation's fiscal problems can't be solved in a couple of weeks.

 

Republican Sen. Lamar Alexander told the Alley Thursday that Congress will need to use the lame duck to create a window next year in which to deal with the fiscal cliff.

 

"There's no practical way in my judgement to take all the issues from Bush tax cuts, to the tax reform to the sequestration all these issues (and) deal with them in three or four weeks. But we could create a window that produces a result," he said.

 

About 60 senators are actively engaged in discussions over the fiscal cliff with 10 or 15 in serious talks, he said. And he signaled that the GOP may be ready to wheel and deal.

 

"Almost every Republican leader I know in the Congress has made it clear that while they don't think we need more revenues that if the Democrats are willing to restructure entitlements, they're willing to provide new revenues," he said.

 

 

The GOP is wrong to say Obama cut nuclear weapons budget
The Washington Post Editorial Board
August 31, 2012

THE REPUBLICAN PARTY platform includes some scare talk. "The United States is the only nuclear power not modernizing its nuclear stockpile," the platform warns. "It took the current administration just one year to renege on the President's commitment to modernize the neglected infrastructure of the nuclear weapons complex -- a commitment made in exchange for approval of the New Start treaty."

 

These statements are wrong and misleading. President Obama has increased the budget for nuclear weapons and the weapons complex. The president doesn't like to talk about it as much -- he prefers the lofty speech about a world free of nuclear weapons -- but the truth is that in this realm he's a big spender.

 

On the nuclear stockpile, the National Nuclear Security Administration, a part of the Energy Department, is undertaking a 20-year, multi­billion-dollar effort, known as the Life Extension Programs, to prolong the life of four types of nuclear warheads and bombs. Just one of them, the B-61 gravity bomb, is facing enormous new cost estimates. While the president has said he won't build new nuclear weapons, the existing arsenal is getting a massive and costly overhaul.

 

More broadly, the United States is modernizing the triad: the land-sea-air combination of planes, submarines and missiles that delivers the nuclear bombs and warheads. While some have suggested it may be overkill two decades after the Cold War ended, the president decided to keep the triad intact. The modernization of the Minuteman III intercontinental ballistic missile and the Trident II submarine-launched ballistic missile is underway, and the Navy is planning to replace the Ohio-class ballistic missile submarines. Not a sign of weakness there.

 

Congressional Republicans have been griping lately that Mr. Obama broke faith with a 10-year spending projection for nuclear weapons activities laid out when the New Start treaty was submitted for Senate ratification in 2010. In fact, led by House Republicans, Congress last year cut back the president's proposed spending for nuclear weapons. Mr. Obama's proposed 2013 budget is just slightly below the original top line of the 10-year plan -- $7.58 billion, compared with $7.95 billion -- because of the congressional cuts and the growing pressure on spending. This minor dip is not bad faith, "reneging" or unilateral disarmament; rather, it is how Congress and government work. Mr. Obama's nuclear weapons budgets are still sizably above those left by President George W. Bush.

 

The president made a commitment in a letter to the Senate in February 2011 to accelerate, "to the extent possible," the design and engineering of a new plutonium facility, the Chemical and Metallurgy Research Replacement building at the Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico. But after escalating costs and budget cuts by Congress, the administration decided that it could not sustain this project and another multibillion-dollar uranium plant in Tennessee. So the president made choices and proposed in his 2013 budget to defer work on the plutonium facility for five years. Again, a reasonable response to changing ­circumstances.

 

It is wrong for Republicans to turn these fiscal hiccups into campaign broadsides. The United States has the most accurate, powerful and modern nuclear force in the world. Unfortunately, too much of the nuclear weapons argument is still trapped in a Cold War mind-set, as if the Soviet Union were still around. What we need now is a thorough going debate on the role of nuclear deterrence in the 21st century and what arsenal will most properly and effectively meet the ­challenge.

 

EM Hosts Second Contract Performance and Management Workshop in 2012
EM News Flash

August 29, 2012

 

WASHINGTON, D.C. - EM hosted its second Environmental Management Contract Performance and Management Workshop at DOE headquarters today.

 

The goal of the workshop was to identify opportunities related to EM's goal to improve project, budget and contract management with the objective of delivering results on time, within cost and with world-class technical competencies. Participants in the workshop laid out steps to successfully implement opportunities identified to improve contract management at the first EM contract performance and management workshop held in February.

 

In addition to DOE senior leadership, participants included corporate representatives from all EM large- and small-business prime contract cleanup and construction contractors.

 

"Today's workshop with the corporate leadership was another great example of effective partnering between EM and its contractor counterparts," Senior Advisor for Environmental Management David Huizenga said. "This productive partnership results in the best ideas that move us forward in our mission to safely clean up from the Cold War on time and within costs, thereby saving taxpayers money."

 

At the Feb. 15 workshop, a number of proposed recommendations were formulated. Participants in today's workshop laid out a path to achieve those recommendations and benefit taxpayers, and identified several additional actions.

 

Energy Secretary Investigates Hanford's Waste Treatment Plant
Anna King, NPR
September 4, 2012

RICHLAND, Wash. - U.S. Department of Energy Secretary Steven Chu is at the Hanford Nuclear Reservation this week. Chu's taking time out of his schedule to personally investigate concerns raised about Hanford's massive waste treatment plant in southeast Washington.

 

Secretary Chu has a Ph.D. in physics. And he's leading a top-flight team of eight nuclear and engineering experts in an on-site investigation into Hanford's $12 billion waste treatment plant.

 

They're especially focused on the plant's black cells. These are huge rooms inside the factory that will be so radioactively hot that they're permanently sealed-off from humans.

 

"They may make recommendations for design changes or operational enhancements that may improve the performance and safety of the plant," says the Department of Energy's Carrie Meyer.

 

Chu's visit comes just as Hanford managers have now found a total of three areas of suspect material in the space between two walls of a double-hulled tank. Energy officials are planning further checks to determine what the stuff is and whether are more areas of concern.

 

WA State demands DOE response about Hanford vit plant consent decree
Annette Cary, Tri-City Herald
August 31, 2012

Washington state leaders have threatened to take the first step down the path toward legal action over court-ordered deadlines that may be missed by the Department of Energy at Hanford's vitrification plant.

 

They have given Energy Secretary Steven Chu a deadline to send a response showing DOE is serious about meeting requirements of a court-ordered consent decree that includes having the Hanford vitrification plant in full operation in 2022.

 

The state has postponed the first step toward taking the Department of Energy back to court under the consent decree, pending a response from Chu by Sept. 26, said Gov. Chris Gregoire and Attorney General Rob McKenna in a letter to Chu dated Wednesday.

 

The consent decree, signed in October 2010 to resolve a lawsuit filed by the state against DOE, allows the state to take DOE back to court if it believes the federal government is not complying with requirements. However, first the state and DOE must discuss issues in a 40-day dispute resolution period.

 

"The Energy Department values its relationship with the state of Washington and recognizes the importance of working together to achieve the safe and timely cleanup of Hanford's tank waste," said Carrie Meyer, DOE spokeswoman, Thursday. "We will work with the state to address their concerns."

 

DOE told the state just 13 months after the consent decree was signed that it might not be able to meet some unspecified deadlines, according to the letter.

 

In May, DOE confirmed that 10 consent decree requirements for building and operating the Hanford vitrification plant were at risk, starting with a Dec. 31, 2014 deadline to place concrete slabs at the 98-foot elevations for the vitrification plant's Pretreatment Facility.

 

The 10th deadline at risk was the one requiring the plant to be fully operational at the end of 2022.

 

The deadlines were at risk because of technical issues related to keeping waste well mixed, erosion and corrosion of metal components of the plant over its operating lifetime and the documented safety analysis, the state was told.

 

In addition, DOE told the state in May that it had directed its contractor Bechtel National to develop a new cost and schedule for the plant which would be based on annual budgets of $690 million. DOE had earlier based plans to keep the plant on schedule by spending as much as $970 million in the fiscal year with starts in October.

 

Then in July, DOE said it would delay creating a new cost and schedule for key parts of the plant until technical issues that could affect the safe and efficient operation of the plant are addressed.

 

The $12.2 billion plant is being built to turn up to 56 million gallons of radioactive waste now stored in underground tanks, some of them prone to leaks, into a stable glass form for disposal. The waste is left from the past production of plutonium for the nation's weapons program.

 

DOE apparently has decided to ignore the court's order "without even evaluating whether maintaining compliance remains technically possible," according to a statement from the governor's office Thursday.

 

"We believe the CD (consent decree) requires the department to do everything in its power to implement and meet the current CD schedule, as an order of the court," Gregoire and McKenna said in the letter. "This includes both addressing technical concerns and aggressively pursuing funding from Congress, internal department resources and any other federal sources."

 

Any further delay in the construction and the operation of the vitrification plant puts the state at risk, according to Gregoire and McKenna.

 

"Waste held in unfit underground single-shell tanks, many of which have already leaked, threatens the groundwater, the river and our public health," their letter said.

 

The consent decree requires DOE to demonstrate "good cause" for requesting any schedule extension.

 

"It is our view that, at a minimum, a reasonably diligent response to a possible schedule delay must involve DOE promptly obtaining all information necessary to inform DOE, the state and the court of the full range of possible responses to the technical issues giving rise to DOE's schedule concerns," the letter said.

 

It includes developing a schedule that does not assume budgetary limitations and is designed to meet all consent decree requirements or come as close as is possible, the letter said.

The state sent a letter to the Department of Justice in May asking that such a cost and schedule be developed, but the request was declined, according to the letter.

 

The letter was timed to a visit by Chu to Richland next week with a group of hand-picked experts to study vitrification plant technical issues, particularly those related to its black cells. Those enclosed rooms will be too radioactive for workers to enter to make repairs after the plant starts operating.

 

"I am grateful that Secretary Chu is providing personal attention to these serious issues and involving additional experts in his review," Gregoire said in a statement Thursday. "Secretary Chu has indicated that he will discuss the results of his review with me and I look forward to hearing his plans for satisfying the consent decree requirements."

 

McKenna also commented Thursday on a memo written by DOE's engineering design director last week calling for Bechtel to be removed as the design authority for the vitrification plant. The memo was sent to Hanford's DOE Office of River Protection manager, Scott Samuelson.

 

"We have been following many of the technical issues described in the memo for some time, and while we understand the issues to be serious, they can be resolved," McKenna said in a statement.

 

"DOE, as the owner of the site and the entity responsible for meeting requirements set forth by the court, is responsible for ensuring that the plant runs safely and effectively for 40 years," he said.

 

Savannah River Site contractor asks for more voluntary layoffs
Rob Pavey, The Augusta Chronicle
August 31, 2012

Savannah River Site's management contractor issued an appeal Friday for workers willing to resign or retire as part of a workforce reduction approved by the U.S. Department of Energy in 2010.

 

In a memo to employees, Savannah River Nuclear Solutions President Dwayne Wilson said 1,065 workers have left the site since the reduction of up to 1,400 employees was authorized almost two years ago.

 

"With the significant progress in accelerating work at SRS, and as we near the completion of legacy transuranic waste disposition, we will be able to allow employees to voluntarily choose to leave the site or retire," the memo said.

 

Workers willing to participate will receive a week of pay for each year of service, up to 26 weeks, and some might also qualify for medical benefits. The window for workers to apply opens Tuesday, Sept. 4, and closes at 5 p.m. Sept. 28, with notifications made to affected workers Oct. 3-5. Most would work their last day Oct. 12.

 

A company spokeswoman said that no specific number of employees is needed to resign or retire and that there are no plans for layoffs.

 

The downsizing, Wilson's memo said, is being pursued in part because some of the company's projects are coming to a close during the next few months.

 

"The decision to participate is completely voluntary, and management will consider all requests to participate," he said.

 

Accomplishments at SRS include 70 Recovery and Reinvestment Act subprojects and five capital projects completed ahead of schedule and under budget, he said: "We should all be proud of the work accomplished in recent years."

 

First Weapons-Grade Plutonium Shipped from Savannah River Site to New Mexico Disposal Site
Thomas Clements, The Aiken Leader
August 30, 2012

Columbia, SC -- Affirming that surplus weapons plutonium can be disposed of as waste, the Department of Energy has confirmed that the first shipment of contaminated weapons-grade plutonium has been transported from the Savannah River Site (SRS) to the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) in New Mexico.

 

The long-delayed plutonium shipment took place on August 16, as stated at an SRS Citizens Advisory Board (CAB) meeting on August 28.  A written presentation at that CAB meeting also affirmed that SRS "recently made the first shipment to WIPP."

 

DOE had stated that the shipment would take place during the last week of June but could never provide confirmation that requirements in New Mexico to conduct the shipment had been met, so the delay in the shipment has not been a surprise.

 

The plutonium was packaged in the HB-Line at SRS into "Pipe Overpack Containers" which are disposed of in WIPP.  In order to meet WIPP's "waste acceptance criteria" and to make the plutonium theft resistant, it was blended with an inert material which DOE has called "stardust."

 

The plutonium was authorized to be shipped under an "Interim Action Determination," a cursory analysis prepared under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA).  The Interim Action Determination allows shipment of up to 500 kg of SRS plutonium to WIPP.

Disposal of plutonium without a radiation barrier confirms that the earlier goal to dispose of such material along with radioactive material - the so-called "spent fuel standard" - has now been discarded. The Draft Supplemental Environmental impact Statement (SPD Supplemental EIS, page S-14) on plutonium disposition states that "DOE believes that the alternatives analyzed in this SPD Supplemental EIS, including the WIPP Alternative, provide protection from theft, diversion, or future reuse in nuclear weapons akin to that afforded by the Spent Fuel Standard." (S-14).  This further distances DOE from its previous position that plutonium must be irradiated as MOX fuel in a nuclear reactor or surrounded with high-level waste to make it proliferation resistant.

 

The demise of the "spent fuel standard" opens the door to disposal of plutonium as nuclear waste and without a radiation barrier.

 

"It is essential that DOE immediately conduct a comprehensive analysis on an array of options for disposal of surplus plutonium as nuclear waste," said Tom Clements, Nonproliferation Policy Director with the Alliance for Nuclear Accountability.  "Given the myriad of problems with the plutonium fuel (MOX) program, DOE should immediately develop a safer and lower-cost "Plan B" for disposing of plutonium as waste."

 

Because WIPP has a limited capacity for transuranic (TRU) waste - 175,600 cubic meters - as established by the Land Withdrawal Act passed by Congress, only a small volume of plutonium stored at SRS can be taken to WIPP.  As part of the agreement to receive transuranic waste at WIPP, New Mexico ruled out acceptance of either DOE high-level waste or commercial spent fuel, thus not giving consent to accept anything other than a limited volume of TRU waste.

 

SRS is currently storing approximately 13 metric tons of surplus weapons-grade plutonium.  A hearing on disposing of this plutonium will be held on September 4 in N. Augusta, South Carolina. (See Federal Register notice) Given the spiraling cost increases of the plutonium fuel (MOX) program and the looming problems with lengthy testing of MOX "lead use assemblies," the growing problems with the MOX program have prompted a new look at disposing of plutonium as waste.

 

Unraveling the Nuclear Renaissance
Matthew L. Wald, The New York Times
August 31, 2012

Power plants are a bit like insect eggs. At the start, there are huge numbers, but few of them make it to adulthood.

 

The last few days may have seen the demise of two reactor projects that had looked promising a few years ago, when the economy was strong and people worried about the high price of natural gas and the possibility of a price on carbon emissions. But natural gas is at historic lows, carbon charges seem unlikely, and lately neither reactor project has looked likely.

 

On Wednesday, Exelon Corporation, the nation's largest nuclear operator, threw in the towel on a planned twin-reactor project in Victoria County in Texas.

 

Texas is short of generating capacity, but it has vast amounts of natural gas and a highly competitive electric market, both of which make it hard to build a reactor.

 

Exelon had not said exactly when it would build, but it took advantage of a provision in a reformed nuclear licensing system to seek early approval of a 11,500-acre site southeast of the city of Victoria. The licensing system now allows companies to get "early site permits" and "bank" the sites, and later match the preapproved site with a preapproved reactor design, potentially shortening the time between deciding to build a reactor and getting it into operation. Exelon was one of the first to try it out.

 

The company faced opposition from people who said there was not enough water in the area and that the ground was subject to subsidence that could wreck a cooling pond. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission might well have approved the site over these objections, but the company said the economics were not favorable.

 

On Thursday, a panel of administrative law judges ruled that Électricité de France could not proceed with a plant in Maryland, Calvert Cliffs 3.

 

That plant was originally a joint venture between Constellation Energy, which owned the adjacent Calvert Cliffs 1 & 2, and the French. But two years ago that consortium, called Unistar, fell apart when it could not obtain a loan guarantee from the Department of Energy on terms that Constellation found acceptable. (Constellation was later bought by Exelon.)

 

Under an American law from the cold war era, reactors must be controlled by American entities. One purpose of the law was to keep American secrets in American hands, which may be inappropriate now since Électricité de France has more recent experience building power reactors than American companies do, and was seeking to build one of a French design.

 

The judges gave Électricité de France 60 days to show evidence that it was bringing in an American partner. After that, if it wanted to proceed it would have to redo some steps in the application process. But, like Texas, the economics in Maryland are similarly awful.

 

Two projects, each with two reactors, are under way, one in Georgia and one in South Carolina, but no additional groundbreakings seem very likely soon.

 

 

Manhattan Project sites considered for national park
Claudine Zap, Yahoo! News
August 29, 2012

Some of the sites of the Manhattan Project, which led to the development of the atomic bomb during World War II, may become a national park. The U.S. government is considering a proposal to turn three labs established in 1942 into a park so visitors can see where the construction and testing of the A-bomb took place.

 

Both houses introduced a bill in Congress that would designate the sites as a park, and a vote is expected in September. The proposed Manhattan Project National Historical Park would include three locations: Oak Ridge, Tenn., Los Alamos, N.M., and Hanford, Wash.

 

The scientific achievement, completed in less than three years, is considered one of the greatest of the 20th century--and one of the most destructive. Researchers collaborated across the country to build the atomic bomb, then use it on Japan, which led to the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people, acts that some argue hastened the war's end. So the effort to turn the project into a national park raises concerns that it celebrates the decision to build destructive weapons, not simply marks the dawn of the nuclear age.

 

Many national monuments come with controversy. David Barna of the National Park Service told Yahoo News, "The Park Service chronicles American history. That's part of our job, not just scenic parks." He added, "The Park Service has a long history of telling the hard stories of America, good or bad." The locations would add to  the list of U.S. sites that commemorate an event, such as Civil War battlefields.

 

But there is a difference between celebration and commemoration of a historic moment. Ellen McGehee, archaeologist and historian for the Los Alamos National Laboratory, elaborated in an email to Yahoo News: "I view the proposed Manhattan Project National Historical Park sites as educational but very sober places where Americans can learn about one of the most significant events of the 20th century. The fact that the issue is controversial makes it even more important to get this information to people, to let them reflect for themselves on the issue."

 

The public does seem interested, or at least drawn to the fear factor. The Manhattan Project B Reactor at Hanford already holds four-hour tours that frequently sell out. (The site is "vigorously inspected" before each tour to ensure a "safe and enjoyable visit.") The plant produced plutonium for the Fat Man bomb that was dropped over Nagasaki, Japan, in 1945. According to its website, the National Historic Landmark gives visitors "the chance to walk through the world's first full-scale nuclear reactor."

 

At Oak Ridge, visitors would view the mile-long building where uranium was enriched. And at Los Alamos, writes McGehee, the area includes "the Gun Site--where the Little Boy bomb was developed and assembled; V-Site--where the Trinity atomic device was assembled before it was taken to southern New Mexico and tested; and the Quonset Hut--where the Fat Man bomb was assembled before it was shipped to the Pacific."

 

DOE IG report: Opportunities for Energy Savings at Department of Energy Facilities
DOE Inspector General
August 31, 2012

Our review disclosed that the Department had not always effectively identified and implemented energy-saving opportunities through facility evaluations and electricity metering.  Three of the five sites we reviewed (Brookhaven National Laboratory, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, and Los Alamos National Laboratory) had not always identified or implemented low- and no-cost, quick payback energy conservation measures discovered during facility evaluations.  In addition, two of the five sites (Oak Ridge National Laboratory and the Y-12 National Security Complex) had not fully evaluated existing buildings to determine, among other things, whether building systems such as heating and lighting were operating as intended, despite specifically identified savings and recommendations to do so.  In regards to metering, we identified opportunities at two sites visited to improve energy conservation through the use of electricity metering data.  Although a number of factors contributed to instances of ineffective evaluations and electricity metering practices, effectively evaluating systems in existing buildings and using electricity metering data could significantly reduce energy costs and increase energy efficiency across the Department.  We conservatively estimate the Department could save approximately $6.6 million annually if it more proactively assesses and repairs building systems through facility evaluations.  We made several recommendations designed to assist the Department in its efforts to conserve energy and decrease costs through evaluations of existing buildings and electricity metering.  Management concurred with our recommendations and provided actions that will be taken to address issues identified in our report.

 

Pacific leaders urge US to clean up nuclear mess
Gulf News
August 31, 2012

Avarua, Cook Islands: Pacific leaders preparing to greet US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton called on Washington Thursday to clean-up the mess left by its nuclear tests in the Marshall Islands.

 

A meeting of the 15-nation Pacific Island Forum (PIF) in the Cook Islands issued a communique saying the United States, which tested 67 nuclear weapons in the Marshalls from 1946-1958, had a "special responsibility" on the issue.

 

The communique, endorsed by the forum's leaders, said radioactive contaminants were still present in the Marshalls and Washington should "live up to its full obligations" to remove them and compensate affected populations.

 

"(There is) a special responsibility by the United States of America towards the people of the Marshall Islands, who have been and continue to be, adversely affected as a direct result of nuclear weapons tests," it said.

 

Clinton arrived in the Cook Islands later Thursday and PIF leaders had a chance to voice their concerns to her first-hand on Friday, when she meets them in the capital Avarua.

 

She will be the most senior US official to ever visit the summit, in a move seen as sending a pointed message to China that Washington wants to re-engage in the South Pacific, where Beijing's influence has grown in recent years.

 

The PIF leaders also welcomed moves to restore democracy in Fiji, which was suspended from the grouping in 2009 in the wake of a military coup three years earlier.

 

But New Zealand Prime Minister John Key said that they decided against lifting the suspension until they were confident the military regime would not renege on a pledge to hold elections in 2014, as it did in 2009.

 

"One of the reasons not to reinstate is because of serious questions such as what happens to the military and whether they are sent back to the barracks," he told reporters.

 

The communique also called for action on climate change, which threatens many of the low-lying island states, and marine conservation.

 

Host nation the Cook Islands announced the creation of the world's largest marine park, a vast swathe of ocean almost twice the size of France, at the summit's opening ceremony on Tuesday.

 

The PIF leaders also expressed condolences to Australia over the loss of five troops killed this week in Afghanistan, the Australian military's deadliest day since Vietnam.

 

The deaths forced Australian Prime Minister Julia Gillard to cut short her trip to the summit and return to Canberra.

 

They agreed that next year's forum will be held in the Marshall Islands, which is set to place more pressure on the United States over its nuclear legacy.

 

A UN fact-finding mission to the northern Pacific nation found in March that test-affected islanders "feel like nomads in their own country" and had suffered long-term health problems for the Cold War-era nuclear programme.