Todd Jacobson
NS&D Monitor
3/07/2014
Senate lawmakers have begun fighting back against the Obama Administration’s decision to place the Mixed Oxide Fuel Fabrication facility project on cold standby. In a March 6 letter to Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz, seven Senators—including both members of South Carolina’s Senate delegation and Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-La.), the new head of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee—urged the Department of Energy to wait on putting the facility in cold standby during Fiscal Year 2014. “It is our understanding that the Department of Energy (DOE) is planning to use FY 2014 funds to begin this process,” the Senators wrote. “This would be inappropriate and we discourage this in the strongest possible terms.”
DOE began building the MOX project at the Savannah River Site in 2007, and the project has long been the Administration’s planned option for disposing of 68 tons of surplus weapons-grade plutonium (34 tons apiece) under an agreement signed with Russia in 2000. But rising costs—the estimated price tag for the facility had increased to $7.7 billion and the lifecycle costs of the project had ballooned to about $30 billion—as well as tepid interest from utilities in purchasing the fuel drove the Administration to move toward formally shutting down the project as part of its FY 2015 budget request.
Senators: Let Legislative Process Play Out
The Administration is requesting $221 million in FY 2015 to put the project in cold standby, and is expected to soon issue a “partial stop work order” to project contractor Shaw AREVA MOX Services. DOE officials have said they will assess other alternatives to MOX to meet the nation’s plutonium disposition commitments, though they’ve left the door open for MOX to return if there is a way to significantly drive down the cost of the project. NNSA nonproliferation chief Anne Harrington said earlier this week that additional studies will be conducted over the next 12 to 18 months to come up with a plutonium disposition path forward.
In statements earlier this week, South Carolina’s Congressional delegation vowed to fight the decision, with Sen. Lindsey Graham (R) saying the decision “will not stand.” Graham and Sen. Tim Scott (R-S.C.) were among the seven Senators that authored the March 6 letter to Moniz. The letter emphasized that FY 2014 funds appropriated by Congress are for construction of the facility and not to put it into cold standby. “While we share your concerns regarding the increased costs associated with the plutonium disposition program, we are concerned that the budget request will end up adding to the costs while we still try to consider options regarding the program,” the Senators wrote. “As such, to not foreclose options and drive costs, it is our opinion that construction activities continue until the Department of Energy (DOE) receives further guidance through the legislative process.”
Cold Standby a Bad Signal
The Senators also suggested that putting the project in cold standby represents a signal that the Administration is not committed to its agreement with Russia. “The budget submission claims the ‘Administration remains committed to the U.S.-Russia Plutonium Management and Disposition Agreement,’” they wrote. “We remind you that under the terms of this agreement, MOX is the only acceptable disposition path for the 34 metric tons of American weapons grade plutonium. If the Administration does remain committed to this agreement, it does not make sense to stop construction of this facility at this time.” Sens. Richard Burr (R-N.C.), Kay Hagan (D-N.C.), Saxby Chambliss (R-Ga.), and Johnny Isakson (R-Ga.) also signed the letter.
