Kenneth Fletcher
WC Monitor
5/29/2015
Members of Ohio’s Congressional delegation are asking the Department of Energy how it plans to avoid layoffs at the Portsmouth site in 2016 given planned funding levels and cuts in the uranium transfers used to help pay for cleanup at the site. DOE recently announced plans to reduce the uranium transfers from 2,400 metric tons annually to 1,600 metric tons per year, which is expected to have an impact of about $65 million in Fiscal Year 2016 for Fluor B&W Portsmouth, the site’s D&D contractor. “The 1,600 MTU level for 2016 could create a significant funding gap next year should uranium prices remain where they are today or fall. This will reignite the uncertainty that surrounds the project and it runs counter to the efforts of the Ohio delegation in Congress,” states a May 21 letter to DOE by Sen. Rob Portman (R) and Reps. Brad Wenstrup (R) and Bill Johnson (R).
The reduction in uranium transfers comes after DOE proposed a FY 2016 budget of $167 million for D&D work at Portsmouth, which is a sharp cut from enacted levels and raises the question of layoffs. “We respectfully request that DOE explain, in detail, how workforce disruptions will be avoided in 2016 given the potential funding shortfalls,” the lawmakers said in their letter to DOE. Last week, Senate Energy and Water Appropriations Ranking Member Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) suggested that the funding level in the DOE request would result in 500 layoffs at the Portsmouth site in FY 2016.
‘Unstable Economic Environment’ Results in $120 Million in Lost Productivity
The lawmakers note that though Congressional appropriators boosted funds for Portsmouth cleanup in Fiscal Year 2015, DOE again proposed cuts in the latest budget. “We are disappointed and dismayed that instead of increasing, or even maintaining, funding for the site, the President’s budget proposals routinely underfund the cleanup work in Piketon,” the letter states. It adds later: “The result of underfunding this clean-up project is instability, inefficiency, and reduced effectiveness. Some have estimated that the unstable economic environment results in annual lost productivity of $120 million, caused in part by the contractor’s inability to stick to a multi-year plan.”
