Kenneth Fletcher
NS&D Monitor
12/5/2014
Authorized funding for the Mixed Oxide Fuel Fabrication Facility in Fiscal Year 2015 would see a significant increase under the final version of the FY 2015 National Defense Authorization Act, unveiled this week. The bill would authorize a funding level of $345 million and would direct that the money be used solely for construction of the plant. That compares to the $196 million included in the Administration’s FY’15 budget request, which called for work on the plant to be ramped down as it moves into a “cold standby” mode. The House this week approved the legislation, while the Senate plans to take it up next week.
The MOX facility is currently the designated pathway in an agreement with Russia for disposal of 34 metric tons of weapons grade plutonium in the United States. But due to cost increases, the Department of Energy announced the cold standby decision in the spring and said it would search for MOX alternatives. The cold standby plans were strongly opposed by some lawmakers and triggered a lawsuit from South Carolina. Subsequently, Obama Administration officials said they would hold off on cold standby until given further direction from Congress.
House and Senate appropriators, who are currently working on a spending package for FY’15, have also gone well above the Administration’s request for funding the project this year. The House version of the FY 2015 Energy and Water Appropriations Act included $345 million for the project, while Senate appropriators have included $400 million.
Pu Alternatives Study Mandated
The defense bill would also require DOE to contract with a “federally funded research and development center to conduct a study to assess and validate the analysis of the Secretary with respect to surplus weapon-grade plutonium options,” according to report language, which would be due 180 days after the bill passes. DOE would subsequently produce a report within 270 days that would also include a life-cycle cost analysis of all alternatives as well as regulatory and public acceptance issues and whether they would conform with the agreement with Russia. Additionally, it asks for the future MOX funding profile if it is continued and the cost of shutting down MOX.
Options considered could not include moving plutonium to a state where the federal government is not meeting legally binding milestones and deadlines in a Tri-Party Agreement, a provision promoted by Rep. Doc Hastings (R-Wash.) in the House bill after fears that material could be sent to the Hanford site.
