Kenneth Fletcher
WC Monitor
5/22/2015
Following ongoing controversy about the Department of Energy’s excess uranium transfers, lawmakers in both the Senate and the House this week introduced legislation that would put a firm cap on the transfers and require them to go through the full rulemaking and public comment process. The bills would cap the transfers at 2,100 metric tons annually from 2016 through 2023, matching DOE’s most recent proposed levels, and 2,700 metric tons for 2024 and beyond. The bills would also require future Secretarial Determinations, which are intended to show the transfers will not have significant impacts on the domestic uranium market, to go through the rulemaking process that includes public notice and comment. Sen. John Barrasso (R-Wyo.), a longtime opponent of DOE’s transfers, and Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.) introduced the Senate legislation, which was also co-sponsored by Sens. John Cornyn (R-Tex.) and Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.). The House version of the bill was introduced by Reps. Cynthia Lummis (R-Wyo.) and Ruben Hinojosa (D-Tex.).
The transfers are used by DOE to help fund cleanup programs at the Portsmouth Gaseous Diffusion Plant as well as a program to downblend highly enriched uranium. After significant concerns from industry and some lawmakers, earlier this month DOE reduced its uranium transfers to 2,100 metric tons starting in 2016, down from to the 2,705 metric tons allowed under the determination completed in May 2014. Notably, the increase in the 2014 previous determination was above a previous guideline of no more than 10 percent of the domestic nuclear fuel market, resulting in opposition from some in the uranium industry and sparking a lawsuit. DOE has since moved to increase participation in the process, opening up the latest Secretarial Determination to public comment. While some industry officials approved of the recent reduction in the transfers, they emphasized that predictability would be key for market stability, saying that it is uncertain if DOE could again increase the transfers in the near future.
‘The Department of Energy Has Lost All Credibility’
The bills are intended to address those concerns. “The Department of Energy has lost all credibility when it comes to managing the public’s stockpile of excess uranium,” Barrasso said in a statement. “It’s time for Congress to step in and ensure that the American public has a say in how the Department manages our excess uranium stockpile. Our bipartisan bill will require that the Department dispose of this stockpile in a transparent manner, answer to the public, and maximize the value of this uranium for American taxpayers.”
Industry Group: Bill Would Provide ‘Certainty’ For Portsmouth Cleanup
The uranium mining industry group Uranium Producers of America “strongly supports” the legislation, said Scott Melbye, Executive Vice President of Uranium Energy Corporation and previous President of the Uranium Producers of America. “While we recognize the inventory is an important taxpayer asset that can be leveraged for priorities like the cleanup of the enrichment plant in Portsmouth, the disposition of the inventory should be transparent and the amount of material entering the market each year should be capped,” Melbye said in a statement. “This bipartisan legislation is a win for taxpayers. The bill requires the Department to formally seek public input regarding the management of the inventory and helps ensure the Department maximizes taxpayer value for this asset. The legislation will also ensure the disposition of the inventory is predictable, providing certainty for the cleanup of Portsmouth and at the same time minimizing the impact on the domestic uranium production, conversion, and enrichment industries.”
