March 17, 2014

SHOWDOWN ON URANIUM ENRICHMENT FUNDING

By ExchangeMonitor

Both supporters and opponents of a $150 million federal program for uranium enrichment activities are ramping up efforts to sway other lawmakers as the Defense Authorization Act gets ready to hit the House floor. Rep. Steve Pearce (R-N.M.) is a leading opponent of the Department of Energy research and development program, which is expected fund R&D in support of USEC’s American Centrifuge Project, a competitor to the URENCO USA enrichment plant in Pearce’s district. Pearce plans to offer two amendments on the floor tomorrow: One would strike the $150 million currently authorized in the legislation. Another would strike funding and require the Comptroller General to conduct a study on which companies could legally provide enriched uranium to the federal government for tritium production and naval reactors.

Meanwhile, in response to Pearce’s efforts Rep. Mike Turner (R-Ohio), chairman of the Strategic Forces Subcommittee of the House Armed Services Committee, is set to hold a members-only briefing this morning with the National Nuclear Security Administration “on the importance of developing a domestic source of uranium enrichment to our national security,” according to a letter from Turner to members earlier this week. “According to the NNSA, in the very near future, the United States will need a fully domestic source of enriched uranium, based on domestically-developed technology, to support the nuclear weapons program and Navy nuclear reactors program.”

However, Pearce and Rep. Ed Markey (D-Mass.), another leading USEC opponent, sent a message to lawmakers yesterday calling the claim that a domestic enrichment capacity is necessary part of “inaccurate statements and correspondence that have been circulating about language to provide another subsidy for the development of a uranium enrichment program in Ohio that is contained in the Defense Authorization bill.” Pearce and Markey contend that tritium is not a special nuclear material, and therefore not restricted to domestic companies by international treaties. “So don’t be fooled. The funding contained in these bills is not needed for national security, and just perpetuates hundreds of millions of dollars in unnecessary subsidies,” the message states.

Comments are closed.