ECA Update: October 18, 2012
Published: Thu, 10/18/12
|
Frank Munger: Budget uncertainty costing cleanup jobs
Frank Munger, KnoxNews.com
October 10, 2012
Frank Munger, KnoxNews.com
October 10, 2012
The U.S. Department of Energy's Oak Ridge cleanup manager has been eliminating jobs in a systematic way over the past couple of months, with an even bigger ramp-down last week, when more than 100 jobs were cut at the East Tennessee Technology Park.
Even more jobs losses at URS|CH2M Oak Ridge (UCOR) and its subcontractors are reported to be on the way, although specifics aren't available. Folks at DOE's Oak Ridge office have been fairly quiet about the job reductions and the budget situation, at least until the funding associated with the Continuing Resolution for Fiscal Year 2013 was clear.
Last week, in response to questions about the Oak Ridge cleanup funding, federal spokesman Mike Koentop said the budget resolution provided about $98 million to fund decommissioning and demolition activities at the East Tennessee Technology Park for the first six months of FY 2013, which began Oct. 1.
"This level of funding will allow UCOR to complete demolition and waste disposal of the north end of the K-25 Building in January, continue demolition preparation work in the Tc-99 (radioactive technetium-99) area of the building's East Wing, and complete some demolition preparation work in the K-27 Building," Koentop said.
K-27 is a sister plant to the historic K-25 uranium-enrichment facility, and it will become a focal point of cleanup after the work on K-25 is completed. Based on the funding information provided by Koentop, the number didn't appear to be dramatically different from the FY 2012 levels. However, the uncertainty about what will take place in the second half of FY 2013 is apparently playing a significant factor in employment decisions.
According to Koentop, the funding for cleanup work at the East Tennessee Technology Park for the entirety of the 2012 budget was about $200 million, which was supplemented by another $15 million carried over from the previous year (including some Recovery Act dollars).
"UCOR worked aggressively throughout FY12, which allowed them to accelerate the completion schedule for K-25 and begin pre-demolition and characterization work in K-27," the DOE spokesman said.
Because of the current funding levels under the continuing resolution and uncertainties for the last half of the fiscal year, work on K-25 and K-27 has slowed, he said.
"That, along with the fact that K-25 demolition is nearly complete, has necessitated the need for UCOR to restructure its workforce," Koentop said.
He emphasized that the K-25 work remains ahead of its approved schedule, with work likely to be finished well ahead of the target completion date of December 2015.
RETIREE OUTLOOK: Dub Shults, former director of ORNL's Analytical Chemistry Division, was elected Monday to another term as president of the Coalition of Oak Ridge Retired Employees. He emphasized the group will continue to fight to improve the lot of contractor employees -- even though there's no near-term likelihood of a pension increase because of the economy and other factors.
"This is not what you want to hear and not what I would like to say, but I believe that's the truthful answer," Shults said.
Nuclear Power Prominent in US Presidential Candidates' Energy Policies
Melissa Pistilli, Uranium Investigating News
October 11, 2012
As evidenced by last week's initial US presidential debate between incumbent Barack Obama and Republican nominee Mitt Romney, energy independence is central to the upcoming US election. Both candidates' energy policies support more domestic energy production and a sharp move away from reliance on foreign oil.
While Romney and President Obama have different opinions on what energy mix will best suit the nation's needs, both consider nuclear energy a crucial component of an "all-of-the-above" approach to energy production -- as do 65 percent of Americans and a growing number of environmentalists and law makers.
The Obama administration's energy policy supports the expansion of nuclear energy. Under Obama, the government's 2012 budget allocated $36 billion in loan guarantees for new nuclear reactors and more than $800 million in loan guarantees for nuclear research, an IBISWorld report states. The research report also highlights Obama's Clean Electricity Standard and its push for more electricity to be produced from zero-carbon sources. "These climate-change policies will lead to a boost in nuclear-energy production," said IBISWorld.
New nuclear reactors approved
This year, the US approved construction of reactors for the first time in nearly 30 years; they are expected to come online by 2017. The Southern Company (NYSE:SO) won approval from the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) to construct two new reactors at its Vogtle power plant near Waynesboro, Georgia. Currently, another 16 plants across the country have applied to the NRC to build 25 more reactors.
Last month, the NRC issued a license that allows General Electric-Hitachi Global Laser Enrichment (GLE) to build and operate the first uranium enrichment plant with classified laser technology, a more cost-effective process than employing centrifuges. The plant "could provide a steady supply of uranium enriched right here in the US to the country's nuclear reactors," GLE CEO Chris Monetta said.
The US Department of Energy (DOE) "has played a pivotal role in advancing a public-private cost-sharing program that supports the development of smaller reactors," according to former Environmental Protection Agency administrator and former New Jersey Governor Christine Todd Whitman and Dr. Patrick More, co-founder and former leader of Greenpeace -- current co-chairs of the Clean and Safe Energy Coalition.
Where will waste go?
However, the US nuclear revival has been held up by the fact that the country lacks a long-term plan for dealing with nuclear waste. Currently, most plants keep waste onsite in temporary storage pools, but that is only a short-term solution to a long-term problem. In June 2012, a federal appeals court ruled that the NRC has not provided "reasonable assurance" that it has a long-term waste-management solution -- as a result, the NRC will not be approving any new projects for some time.
The plan had been to move waste to a repository at Nevada's Yucca Mountain. The US government has already signed contracts with several utilities, including Southern, for waste disposal at Yucca Mountain. The repository was supposed to open in 1998, but politics and legal issues stalled the project for years.
Obama put the project on ice in 2010, appointing the Blue Ribbon Commission on America's Nuclear Future to develop recommendations for creating a safe, long-term solution to nuclear waste management and storage. The Commission delivered its final report in January of this year, calling for the creation of a federal agency aimed at soliciting and evaluating voluntary proposals from states interested in hosting nuclear disposal areas. The idea is similar to what Romney proposed in October 2011 and would involve states offering disposal sites in exchange for monetary compensation.
What next?
The freeze on new reactor approvals hasn't stopped the Obama administration from pushing forward on nuclear energy research and development. In late September, the US Department of Energy announced $13 million in funding for university-led nuclear innovation projects under the Nuclear Energy University Programs (NEUP). "The awards ... build upon the Obama Administration's broader efforts to promote a sustainable nuclear industry in the U.S. and cultivate the next generation of scientists and engineers," the DOE press release states. The funding was awarded to research groups at the Georgia Institute of Technology, the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign and the University of Tennessee.
Romney has said he would simplify the current lengthy Nuclear Regulatory Commission licensing process to fast track the approval of new reactors with approved design or near-existing facilities, thereby allowing projects to be completed in under two years. "By instating shorter approval times and addressing other nuclear power industry problems, Romney's plans are expected to lead to a more rapid expansion for this industry than is projected under Obama's policies," the IBISWorld report states.
IBISWorld analysts are forecasting that nuclear power industry revenue (2007 to 2012 annualized rate of 2.7 percent) will grow at an average annual rate of 3.3 percent from 2012 to 2017 under Obama; however, if Romney is elected, "the industry would likely grow at a quicker pace over the same period."
GAO report, Most DOE Cleanup Projects Are Complete, but Project Management Guidance Could Be Strengthened
U.S. Government Accountability Office
October 15, 2012
From October 2009 through March 2012, the number of full-time equivalent (FTE) employees funded by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Recovery Act) and working on Department of Energy's (DOE) Office of Environmental Management (EM) cleanup projects peaked at about 11,000 FTEs in the quarter ending September 2010, according to data on the federal government's Recovery Act website. By the second quarter of fiscal year 2012, as projects were completed, FTEs had decreased to about 1,400 FTEs; 12 of 17 sites reported no Recovery Act FTEs; and about $5.6 billion of a total $6 billion in Recovery Act funds had been spent. According to EM data, as of April 30, 2012, 78 of the 112 Recovery Act-funded cleanup projects were complete, and 72 of the 78 projects met DOE's performance standard of completing project work scope without exceeding the cost target by more than 10 percent.
According to EM officials, the completed Recovery Act projects have helped accelerate the cleanup at the sites. GAO, however, found several inconsistencies in how EM set and documented projects' scope, cost, and schedule targets. Without clear scope, cost, or schedule targets in performance baselines, it becomes difficult to assess project performance. For example, in some cases, EM set scope targets differently in different documents and claimed project success even if key performance parameters were not achieved. Current guidance on setting performance baselines is more comprehensive for capital asset projects, such as building or demolishing facilities or constructing remediation systems, than for projects known as operation activity projects, such as operating a groundwater treatment plant. In addition, capital asset projects costing under $10 million are classified as operation activity projects.
Some of EM's long-standing project management problems occurred during its implementation of several Recovery Act projects, primarily insufficient early planning before setting performance baselines. For example, a project to remove wastes from a landfill at one site exceeded its $111 million cost target by $20 million because, after beginning the project, officials determined that the site would need to be excavated to a depth of almost double that planned. In addition, EM's new initiative to reclassify projects as either capital asset or operation activity projects raised concerns about how projects were reclassified. EM does not have a clear policy that sets out under what conditions and how EM should break a capital asset project into smaller, discrete operation activity projects. Project classification is important, however, because some requirements apply only to capital asset projects. EM's guidance for projects classified as operation activity projects under this initiative states that certain approval and reporting requirements will not be applied, and others will be applied as appropriate. Some DOE and other officials expressed concern that projects could be broken into smaller projects to avoid the requirements. For example, a $30 million project, partially funded with Recovery Act funds, was divided into 18 smaller projects, each below the $10 million threshold. The cost for one of these smaller projects eventually doubled--from $8 million to $16 million--but was not reclassified as a capital asset project. EM has been gathering information on lessons learned from Recovery Act projects, some of which could be applied as corrective measures to other EM cleanup work.
Prairie Island Indian Community Granted Federal Hearing in Fight against 40 Year Extension of Nuclear Waste Storage
Prairie Island Indian Community
October 11, 2012
WELCH, Minn., Oct. 11, 2012 -- /PRNewswire/ -- In a filing with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) this week, the Prairie Island Indian Community (PIIC) previewed issues it hopes to raise during an early November hearing with the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board - when the tribe will continue its fight against a 40-year extension of onsite nuclear waste storage on Prairie Island. Xcel Energy's initial Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation (ISFSI) license expires on Oct. 19, 2013, and in the ongoing absence of a national waste repository like Yucca Mountain, the utility company has applied to extend onsite storage until 2053 - a move PIIC argues could put Minnesotans at considerable risk.
"Four more decades of storage could expose all of us to the vulnerabilities of aging facilities, human error, and natural disasters," said Tribal Council President Johnny Johnson. "But the real problem with the request is that it's based on the fiction that it's only a 40-year extension for only 48 dry casks. There's already enough nuclear waste in the spent fuel pool to fill another 30 casks -11 more than the 48 casks in the current license, and in just 20 more years of plant operation the plant will generate enough waste to fill 98 casks. Washington politics will continue to delay the creation of a federally-mandated geologic repository like Yucca Mountain, and the 98 casks containing more than 2,500 tons of radioactive nuclear waste will be stranded indefinitely along the banks of the Mississippi River and within 30 miles of the metro area.
"When onsite nuclear storage was first approved in Minnesota 20 years ago, Minnesotans and the Prairie Island Indian Community were told there would be no more than 17 casks and that it would be temporary - the federal government was legally required to develop a national repository by 1998. After decades of scientific research and $15 billion in investments by American ratepayers, efforts to create the only nuclear waste storage facility in the United States specifically mandated by federal law, the Yucca Mountain Repository in Nevada, were suspended in 2010. To date, no replacement facility has been identified.
The Prairie Island Indian Community previews its case
On August 24, the Prairie Island Indian Community filed with the NRC a request for hearing and petition to intervene in Xcel Energy's application to extend its ISFSI license another 40 years. The request for a hearing was granted by the NRC on September 25. The Tribe's proximity to the waste,combined with its June 8, 2012 federal court victory challenging the NRC's proposed "Temporary Storage Rule" and its accompanying "Waste Confidence Decision Update," make the timing of this hearing unique.
"We believe we have a strong case to make," said Johnson. "Forcing us to store this waste in our backyards and refusing to pick it up for another 40 years or more violates the Nuclear Waste Policy Act. The federal government needs to redouble its efforts to establish a deep geologic repository. A promise is a promise - and in this case, it's also the law.
"In this week's official filing with the NRC, PIIC outlined key issues it will address at the hearing, including the need for a more robust review of the potential impacts and considerable risk associated with storing 98 casks of nuclear waste on Prairie Island indefinitely. The hearing with the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board is tentatively scheduled for Nov. 8 and 9, 2012.
About the Prairie Island Indian Community
The Prairie Island Indian Community, a federally recognized Indian Nation, is located in southeastern Minnesota along the banks of the Mississippi River, approximately 30 miles from the Twin Cities of Minneapolis and St. Paul. Twin nuclear reactors and 29 large steel nuclear waste storage casks sit just 600 yards from Prairie Island tribal homes. A total of 98 casks could be stranded on Prairie Island indefinitely unless the federal government fulfills its promise to build a permanent storage facility. The only evacuation route off the Prairie Island is frequently blocked by passing trains. The Tribe has been pushing for the removal of the nuclear waste since 1994 when Xcel Energy was first allowed to store the waste near its reservation. On the web: www.prairieisland.org
Reactions mixed to possible transfer of Hanford land for industrial development
Dori O'Neal, Tri-City Herald
October 11, 2012
About 50 people turned out Wednesday night for a hearing on the possible transfer of 1,641 acres of Hanford land for industrial development.
The Tri-City Development Council (TRIDEC), in partnership with Richland and Port of Benton, made the proposal to the Department of Energy last year.
TRIDEC Vice President Gary Petersen said about 10,000 acres of Hanford land already has been turned over to various city, county and private industry interests since 1966. The Pacific Northwest National Laboratory and the Richland Airport now sit on land once considered part of Hanford.
TRIDEC is part of a community reuse organization authorized by Congress in 1993 to represent communities adversely affected by DOE workforce restructuring at defense nuclear facilities.
Some who spoke Wednesday expressed concerns about who the land would be turned over to.
"I'd like to see the transfer to the Port of Benton or city of Richland and not TRIDEC," said Vince Panesko of Richland. "It scares me that (with TRIDEC in charge) there's a potential for favoritism (to private industry).
"Carl Adrian, president and CEO of TRIDEC, said the council has no intention of being in the land use business and plans to turn over the property to its partners once the land is transferred.
"We have no plans to gain financially from this," Adrian said. "Our dream is to put some of Hanford land back to practical use."
Laura Hanses, who works at Hanford, said she's worried about the possible bottleneck issues that could happen if the land's infrastructure isn't well planned, especially the increased traffic that is bound to erupt as businesses grow.
"There is already a problem with Hanford traffic," she said. "And I hope the continuing mission of Hanford will address that issue.
"The 1,641 acres requested by TRIDEC are near the Richland city limits, on the northwest corner of Horn Rapids Road and Stevens Drive. However, DOE is evaluating 4,413 acres with a goal of transferring 1,641 acres that are no longer needed at Hanford.
DOE has a comprehensive land-use plan for the 586 square miles that make up the Hanford reservation.
About 80 percent of the land is earmarked for preservation or conservation after environmental cleanup is completed of contamination from past production of weapons plutonium.
TRIDEC's proposal for the land includes dividing it into a 900-acre site that could be used for one or two large enterprises providing 2,000 to 3,000 jobs. Three smaller 100- to 200-acre sites would support another 400 to 500 jobs, officials estimate.
DOE now is accepting comments on what should be considered in an environmental study of transferring the land. Comments can be emailed to landconveyanceEA@rl.gov or sent to Paula Call, NEPA document manager, U.S. Department of Energy, Richland Operations Office, P.O. Box 550, MSIN: A2-15, Richland, WA., 00352.
Material between Hanford tank walls apparently radioactive waste
Annette Cary, Tri-City Herald
October 12, 2012
A sample taken from between the inner and outer walls of a Hanford double-shell tank confirms the material is consistent with the radioactive waste held in the tank, according to preliminary test results.
It's more evidence that at least one of Hanford's double-shell tanks, which are needed to hold waste for decades to come, may be deteriorating. Finding waste outside the inner shell of Tank AY-102 is a first for a Hanford double-shell tank.
The Department of Energy expects to know enough by the end of next week to declare whether or not Tank AY-102 is leaking from its inner shell.
Hanford has 56 million gallons of radioactive and hazardous chemical waste held in underground tanks until they can be treated for disposal. The waste is left from the past production of plutonium for the nation's nuclear weapons program.
The waste is being pumped from leak-prone single-shell tanks, some of them built as early as World War II, into 28 newer double-shell tanks. The double-shell tanks might have to hold waste for as long as another 40 years until all the waste can be treated.
It is important to remember that the material within the walls of Tank AY-102 is stable, said Tom Fletcher, DOE assistant manager of the tank farms, in a message to DOE employees Thursday.
No radioactive material has been found outside the outer wall of the tank, and there is no indication of radioactive contamination in the leak-detection pit outside the tank, he said.
The issue was discovered in August during video monitoring of the area between the inner and outer walls that was designed as an overflow space if the inner steel liner were to leak. The outer shell is made of steel and covered with steel-reinforced concrete.
A video camera, inserted down a tank riser that had not previously been used for visual examinations, Riser 90, showed two side-by-side areas of contamination. One was a dry mound about 24 by 36 by 8 inches.
A small sample collected in connection with the video inspections showed the material was radioactive but provided little other information.
Workers next sent video equipment down the remaining nine risers that provide access into the area between the tank's shells, finding nothing unusual near eight of the risers.
But more unusual material was found near one riser, Riser 83, which was on the opposite side of the tank from where contamination had initially been spotted near Riser 90.
It was particularly concerning because a a photo of the same area between the two shells of the tank near Riser 83 in 2006 showed it was clean then.
The sample collected in that area after the video inspection "is largely consistent with the type of material found in that tank," according to Fletcher.
But before reaching a conclusion on whether the inner shell of the tank has leaked, more samples will be collected from the material spotted in August near Riser 90. Results will be analyzed by a technical panel of Washington River Protection Solutions, the DOE contractor for the Hanford tank farms.
Tank AY-102 is among the oldest of Hanford's double-shell tanks, going into service in 1971, and is just past its design life of 40 years. It has a capacity of about 1 million gallons and holds about 850,000 gallons of waste.
Hanford workers have increased monitoring to make sure there is no change in conditions since finding the waste between the shells of Tank AY-102. Longer term, work will be done to determine if other double-shell tanks might have similar issues.
Environmental groups seek updated cost estimates for MOX Project
Rob Pavey, The Augusta Chronicle
October 11, 2012
Environmental groups asserted this week that design changes and other factors will add at least $2 billion to the cost of the government's mixed oxide project at Savannah River Site.
The one-of-a-kind MOX plant, which has been under construction six years, is designed to dispose of 34 metric tons of weapons-grade plutonium by blending small amounts with uranium to make fuel rods for commercial power reactors - a process that forever renders the plutonium unusable for weapons.
In joint comments responding to a revised supplemental environmental impact statement addressing changes in the MOX program, 40 environmental groups said updated budget figures are needed - both for construction and operating costs.
"The MOX plant cost estimate has been frozen at $4.8 billion for the last several years," said the groups, which include the Sierra Club chapters, Alliance for Nuclear Accountability and Southern Alliance for Clean Energy.
The schedule calls for the plant to be completed in 2016 and begin producing commercial fuel in 2018.
However, the groups noted, a 2003 U.S. Department of Energy estimate placed the construction cost at $1.7 billion and forecast a completion date in 2007.
Although new cost estimates have not been publicly released, the groups cited a Sept. 26 report in an industry trade publication, Weapons Complex Monitor, that the internal baseline cost of building the plant had jumped $2 billion.
"Despite repeated requests from public interest groups, DOE has adamantly refused for all of 2012 to release this new cost estimate for either the MOX plant construction or overall plutonium disposition program and is keeping this vital information secret," the groups said.
The government has not altered its mission to dispose of the plutonium, but has amended its original plan to build a freestanding plant to process plutonium "pits" from dismantled warheads into powder for use at the MOX plant. Instead, the new plan - which required amendments to the environmental statements - will use existing facilities, including the H Canyon area at Savannah River Site, to accomplish the same mission.
The National Nuclear Security Administration, which manages the nation's nuclear weapons stockpile and is in charge of the MOX project, is working with Tennessee Valley Authority in its quest to find clients willing to use the fuel. So far, no formal agreement has been reached.
The comment period for the revised environmental impact statement closed Thursday, and the Department of Energy expects to evaluate all comments and issue a record of decision on the changes sometime in 2013.
 |
|
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 |
|
ECA Bulletin |
|
Browse previous editions of the ECA Bulletin |