Kenneth Fletcher
NS&D Monitor
5/29/2015
With numerous studies pointing to downblending as a significantly cheaper option for surplus plutonium disposition than the Mixed Oxide Fuel Fabrication Facility, Senate authorizers are asking for more answers on downblending and alternate uses for the MOX facility. A 2014 Department of Energy analysis of plutonium disposition options and a recently released study by Aerospace Corporation both found that downblending and disposing of the material would be less expensive than turning it into MOX fuel for commercial reactors. However, there are significant questions concerning the downblending option, including renegotiation of an agreement with Russia and the availability of a final disposal place. “The committee is concerned, however, that these analyses inadequately assessed the technical, regulatory, and political feasibility of the downblending option,” states report language accompanying the Senate’s version of the Fiscal Year 2016 National Defense Authorization Act. “To address these inadequacies,” the bill reported out of committee this month would require the NNSA to prepare an analysis of the downblending option.
The MOX facility under construction at the Savannah River Site aims to convert 34 metric tons of surplus weapons plutonium into fuel for commercial nuclear reactors as part of a 2000 agreement with Russia. However, the Administration moved to suspend construction of the facility in 2014 due to cost increases, which resulted in opposition from lawmakers. Recent studies have pointed to downblending, which would involve processing the plutonium at Savannah River or Los Alamos National Laboratory, mixing it with an inert material, and then disposing of it at an underground repository. The NNSA’s study pointed to the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant as a likely disposal site, but that facility remains shut down following a radiological release last year.
Questions Remain for Downblending
The Senate language detailed numerous questions remaining for the downblending option, and requested a new NNSA study by October 31 that would be reviewed by the Government Accountability Office. The bill recommends $5 million in funding for the analysis. Questions to be addressed include the overall lifecycle cost of downblending as well as concerns regarding renegotiation of the agreement with Russia. There are also questions regarding security and transport of the material, nonproliferation impacts, and if an additional repository may be needed. If WIPP is used as an option, questions remain as to necessary regulatory and legislative changes and impacts of the current shutdown of WIPP. The lawmakers also are seeking input from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, the Environmental Protection Agency and the state of New Mexico.
DOE Directed to Look at Alternate Uses of MOX Facility
DOE would also be directed to conduct a “two-step analysis” for alternate uses of the MOX plant if it were not to be used for plutonium disposition, the report states. DOE should also aim to “preserve the long-term mission for the Savannah River Site” by identifying “potential long-term mission needs at the Savannah River Site over the next 30 to 50 years.” Additionally, using GAO “best practices” DOE should “conduct an analysis of alternatives to identify how these mission needs could be met by using the MOX Fuel Fabrication Facility.”
