Kenneth Fletcher
NS&D Monitor
5/2/2014
While the Department of Energy this week backed off from plans to immediately suspend work on the Mixed Oxide Fuel Fabrication Facility and released a long-awaited alternatives study, the plant’s supporters in Congress continued to pressure DOE to commit to MOX completion. Though the Department originally said it would begin “cold shutdown” of the plant in March, this week it pledged to continue construction of the facility until the end of the fiscal year. But DOE still plans to suspend work in Fiscal Year 2015, a move that rankles Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.). “Why shouldn’t everybody involved with this program be fired? To ask the Congress to stop the program, whether it’s 40 percent complete, 60 percent complete, after we’ve made a binding commitment with the Federation of Russia to accept a technology, why shouldn’t you all be fired?” Graham said at a Senate Energy and Water Appropriations Subcommittee hearing with the National Nuclear Security Administration.
The MOX facility is currently the designated pathway inked in a deal with Russia for disposal of 34 metric tons of weapons grade plutonium in each country. But citing major cost increases and tight budgets, the NNSA announced in March that it would immediately suspend work on the facility while it further analyzes alternatives to MOX construction. The NNSA had planned to begin work in March with contractor Shaw AREVA MOX Services to develop a “detailed cold standby plan” for stopping work, according to the Fiscal Year 2015 budget request. But that decision sparked a lawsuit from the state of South Carolina, which claimed that DOE’s use of construction funds to shut down the project was illegal because it lacked Congressional approval—a major complaint of Graham and other lawmakers. The South Carolina Attorney General’s office said this week it is now in discussions with the Department of Justice on whether the announcement will facilitate a resolution to the lawsuit.
Sen. Feinstein Questions MOX Suspension
But pressure from Senate appropriators on the decision has continued, notably including Subcommittee Chair Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.). “I’m really not sure that the right decision has been made,” she said at this week’s hearing, later adding: “Whatever you call this ‘cold hold’ thing, I don’t know what it really accomplishes.” Feinstein and Ranking Member Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.) pressed NNSA Administrator Frank Klotz to assemble a group to look at MOX options similar to the Red Team that examined alternatives to the Uranium Processing Facility, and Klotz committed to examine new ways to look at the project and said he would report back to the subcommittee on the path forward in two weeks.
Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee Chair Mary Landrieu (D-La.) also fought for continuing construction of the MOX facility. “One, it absolutely makes sure that this nuclear material can never be used for weapons anywhere in the world by anyone. … And then, the other interesting part of this on the energy producing side is that we could use it for our nuclear industry. So those are two important issues that are now in jeopardy,” she said at the hearing. “The other issue is, I think, what Senator Graham raised, which would be concerning to any one of the 50 states is, once the department starts a partnership with a state for a big project like this, that we’ve not started haphazardly. There was a tremendous amount of science and engineering and thought and reports that went into this.”
WIPP Cheapest Option in Alternatives Study
As questions mounted in recent weeks about the NNSA’s plans to suspend the MOX project, officials repeatedly pointed to a plutonium disposition alternatives study launched last year by DOE that was still in the works. This week the NNSA released the report, which said that downblending surplus plutonium and disposing of it at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant was the least expensive option by billions of dollars. The WIPP option would cost about $8.8 billion and be completed in 2046 with less risk and uncertainty than MOX, according to the report. That is $16.3 billion less than the “to go” costs for MOX, which the report estimates at $25.1 billion with a completion date of 2043 with “significant risks.”
Notably, the option comes as WIPP is still shut down after a radiation release earlier this year. While some initial shipments of plutonium not suitable for MOX have been made to WIPP, there are a number of hurdles to that option—including amendments to WIPP’s Land Withdrawal Act after recent events have greatly increased scrutiny of the facility. Additionally, if disposal in WIPP were pursued it would mean a renegotiation of the plutonium disposition agreement with Russia, which specifies MOX as the only disposition pathway—and it is a less attractive choice from that standpoint because there is no radiological barrier to retrieval.
The WIPP option was met with skepticism by Graham. “This idea of diluting plutonium and saving $16 billion is just an idea that I think will never bear fruit. Do you have any agreement where to put the diluted plutonium? Do you have an agreement where to put the diluted plutonium? Can you put it at the WIPP? Have they agreed to accept it?” he said, adding later: “So you’re going to start one program and you’re going to look at another alternative with no agreement as to where you would put the diluted plutonium that you can inform the committee of?” Klotz said no discussions have taken place on that option. “This is a first cut at that,” Klotz said, noting that a more detailed study would be conducted over the next 12 to 18 months.
An Impact on State Cooperation?
Graham said DOE’s actions on MOX could have a significant impact on state cooperation with the Department. “The bottom line is just not about MOX, but it’s about what kind of relationship we’re going to have with our states when they step up to the plate to do things,” he said. He noted that as part of the agreement, he helped draft language that would fine the federal government up to $100 million a year if the plutonium was not moved out of South Carolina by 2016. He said he didn’t want the $100 million. Rather, he said he wanted the MOX project back on track. “You’re now telling the state of South Carolina, well, let’s start over. Let’s wait another year, another 15 months. To accept this material to begin with, we had one hell of a fight in South Carolina, where the existing governor said, don’t accept this deal with the federal government; they will leave you hanging. They will leave you out to dry, because DOE has a bad habit of starting programs and stopping programs because they don’t know how to finish a program, and that’s going to affect the states eventually.” He added: “I’m for two things: I’m for modernized weapons and I’m for getting some of this stuff off the table and keeping the commitment to my state. If it can happen to me, it can happen to you.”
Five Alternatives Considered
In all, five alternatives to MOX were considered in the report, though only downblending and disposal came out to have a lower lifecycle cost than MOX. Deep borehole disposal of the plutonium in underground shafts had significant uncertainty related to both siting the facility and renegotating the agreement with Russia. Another option, immobilization of the material, would have a lifecycle cost $28.7 billion and not be completed until 2060 with majort uncertainties and risks. Finally, irradiation of plutonium fuel in fast reactors, which is currently the option pursued by Russia, was estimated to cost twice as much as MOX and not be completed until 2075.
The lifecycle cost for MOX, which the report put at over $25 billion plus more than $4 billion in sunk costs, has also been a point of contention—with contractor officials and Graham claiming that costs may actually be far lower. “I don’t accept for one minute it’s $25 billion. So we’re going to have a contest over are they right,” Graham said, adding, “Secondly, you’re now telling the state of South Carolina, well, let’s start over. Let’s wait another year, another 15 months. To accept this material to begin with, we had one hell of a fight in South Carolina, where the existing governor said, don’t accept this deal with the federal government; they will leave you hanging.”
Klotz: MOX ‘Still Very Much on the Table’
Klotz emphasized that MOX is still “very much” on the table. “The secretary of energy is committed to continue the process of dialoguing with the Congress over this as we work through the discussions on the budget this coming year, and it’s clearly not off the table,” he said. “But the perspective that we operate from is, this is an extraordinarily expensive process. It’s one the nation’s going to be committed to for a long time, whatever path we choose for plutonium disposition, and we have to make sure that, one, we are committed as a nation, over the long haul, to in fact do it this way and balance it against the other demands on the Department of Energy and NNSA budget in the area of weapons modernization and nonproliferation and preventing nuclear terrorism.”
