Staff Reports
NS&D Monitor
1/8/2016
Plans are under way to remove weapon-usable plutonium from the Savannah River Site even as a separate project would bring more foreign plutonium to the South Carolina facility, according to recent and past Department of Energy documents. Both efforts are intended to ensure plutonium that can be used to make nuclear weapons will be disposed of safely and kept from those wishing to use the material for harm, said Francie Israeli, a spokeswoman for the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA).
The Department of Energy wrote on Dec. 24 that it has a preferred alternative for processing 6 tons of plutonium stored at SRS and shipping the material to the Waste Isolation Pilot Plan (WIPP) near Carlsbad, N.M. The plan was introduced as early as April 2015 in a Final Surplus Plutonium Disposition Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement, but gained traction late last month after a report released by nuclear watchdog SRS Watch mentioned the impact statement, among several other related reports. Israeli said the preferred alternative outlined in December updates the April report and confirms that DOE wishes to remove the 6 tons of plutonium from SRS.
The report evaluates the environmental impacts that could come with seeking safe and timely disposition of approximately 13.1 metric tons of surplus plutonium. About 7.1 metric tons of the material is pit plutonium – plutonium that came from the pit, or core, of a nuclear weapon. Another 6 metric tons is non-pit plutonium. A final, disposition pathway has not yet been assigned for either form, but Israeli said processing the non-pit plutonium at SRS is now part of the discussion. There are at least 12 tons of plutonium stored at SRS, but site officials have said the exact number cannot be identified due to security reasons.
While the Department of Energy weighs its options with plutonium removal, the agency is also looking into bringing about 900 kilograms of plutonium to the site for temporary storage. The plutonium would come from Japan and two European countries. Nearly 40 kilograms of plutonium from Sweden, Italy, and Belgium has already been removed and stored at SRS, according to a Global Threat Reduction Initiative presentation made by DOE in December 2014. Israeli said the department first wants to find a way to get the plutonium away from harmful people without bringing it to the United States. However, the U.S. will assume ownership "if we can find no other reasonable pathway to address U.S. national security interests," she stated by email.
The global threat presentation highlighted several concerns with bringing unwanted plutonium to SRS, including "potential backlash" from those who are already frustrated with slow progress in building the site’s Mixed Oxide Fuel Fabrication Facility (MFFF). The facility is a critical part of the nation’s MOX project, which the U.S. would use to meet its commitment in a deal with Russia to dispose of 34 metric tons of weapon-usable plutonium.
Israeli said the 6 tons of plutonium expected to exit the site are not part of the 34 metric tons to be disposed of via the MFFF, which is currently under construction and has faced cost overruns and delays. Cost overruns include a June projection from Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz that it would cost $1 billion a year to adequately fund the MOX program. In addition, South Carolina threatened to sue the federal government if the Department of Energy doesn’t pay $1 million a day to the state for missing a key MOX milestone. Under a 2003 agreement with the state, DOE promised by Jan. 1, 2016, to process either 1 metric ton of the plutonium through the MFFF or remove 1 ton from the state so that South Carolina is not left housing unwanted plutonium.
Despite the issues looming over the MOX project, Israeli said the Department of Energy is still working to meet promises to South Carolina through the plutonium removal initiative. "This preferred alternative would allow DOE/NNSA to continue its progress on the disposition of surplus weapon usable plutonium in furtherance of the policies of the United States to ensure that surplus plutonium is never used in a nuclear weapon, and to remove surplus plutonium from the State of South Carolina," she stated.
SRS Watch Director Tom Clements said sending additional plutonium to the Savannah River Site is intended more to meet political agendas than for nonproliferation reasons. Clements speculated officials hope to report nonproliferation successes at the Nuclear Security Summit in March. He added that excess plutonium should not be stored on-site until a clear disposition pathway is identified. "As there is no clear disposition path for plutonium planned to be imported or any other plutonium now at SRS, this action will result in yet more plutonium being stranded in South Carolina with no pathway out," Clements said.
