Aerospace Report Affirms that MOX Project at SRS Not Sustainable at Current Funding Level
“Plutonium Disposition Study Options Independent Assessment”
redacted report linked here:
https://www.srswatch.org/uploads/2/7/5/8/27584045/aerospace_final_redacted_plutonium_disposition_tor_april13_final_release_050815.pdf
news release linked here
photos: MOX plant, April 21, 2015, by High Flyer of the SRS Watch Air Force, can be used with credit; in one photo Georgia Power’s Plant Vogtle in Georgia, site of two old reactors and two AP1000s under construction, can be seen
—–
NNSA dribbles out environmental document on terminating MOX as “preferred alternative,” via tiny notice in Federal Register by Environmental Protection Agency, May 8, 2015
“EIS No. 20150125, Final Supplement, NNSA, DOE, Surplus Plutonium Disposition, Review Period Ends: Once a Preferred Alternative is identified, DOE will announce its preference in a Federal Register notice. DOE would publish a record of decision no sooner than 30 days after its announcement of a Preferred Alternative. Contact: Sachiko McAlhany 877-344-0513″
—-
SRS Watch new release, May 4, 2015 – release linked here
<strong “mso-bidi-font-weight:=”” normal”=””>After Chronic Delays, DOE’s Terminates Plutonium Disposition EIS Process, Discarding the Problem-Plagued Plutonium Fuel (MOX) Option as the “Preferred Option” and Affirming that the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) is Not Now Actively Pursuing MOX Use
<strong “mso-bidi-font-weight:=”” normal”=””>
<strong “mso-bidi-font-weight:=”” normal”=””>CB&I AREVA MOX Services Dealt another Blow in its Push for $51+ Billion MOX Project<strong “mso-bidi-font-weight:=”” normal”=””>
<strong “mso-bidi-font-weight:=”” normal”=””><span “font-size:12.0pt;=”” line-height:107%”=””>Surplus Plutonium Disposition Supplemental EIS documents linked here – quietly placed on this DOE website in the last few days
Columbia, South Carolina — After a lengthy and embarrassing delay, the U.S. Department of Energy DOE) has concluded the preparation of an environmental document on the disposition of surplus weapons plutonium by abandoning its earlier preference to produce plutonium fuel (MOX) from the material. DOE states in a document released over the weekend that it no longer has a preference for how to dispose of a quantity of surplus plutonium, affirming that the MOX program at the DOE’s Savannah River Site (SRS) in South Carolina remains at high risk of being shut down.
DOE’s National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) had been expected to issue the final environmental document in early 2013 but due to growing problems with the MOX program, DOE froze release of it and indicated for almost two years that it was “under departmental review.” DOE mailed out DVDs with the documents, which arrived to at least one location in South Carolina on Saturday, May 2. DOE also quietly posted the final documents on its website in the last few days. The date of a Federal Register notice on the formal release of the document is expected later this week.
<span “font-size:11.0pt;line-height:107%;font-family:”calibri”,sans-serif;=”” mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin;mso-fareast-font-family:calibri;mso-fareast-theme-font:=”” minor-latin;mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;mso-bidi-font-family:”times=”” roman”;=”” mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi;mso-ansi-language:en-us;mso-fareast-language:=”” en-us;mso-bidi-language:ar-sa”=””>In complete reversal of DOE’s earlier pro-MOX policy, the final Surplus Plutonium Disposition Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (SPD SEIS) concludes that DOE no longer prefers the MOX option but rather states that it has no “preferred alternative” for plutonium disposal “at this time.”
read full release here, with loads of links to documents and MOX plant photos
—–
The MOX-booster-members of Congress stand virtually alone in Congress in their blind allegiance to continue shoveling our tax money to CB&I AREVA MOX Services. While they choose to attack DOE’s cost estimates for the $50+ billion MOX boondoggle looks like they don’t even have their own validated MOX cost estimates on which to base their attacks. We asked them before and they came up empty handed. We doubt they have anything now but the ball is in the court of Senator Lindsey Graham, Senator Tim Scott & Representative Joe Wilson to respond. As is said, time to put up or shut up about this failed and dying project. BTW, $345 million in FY 2016 puts the project on a shut-down track as it needs another $200 million per year for construction (and $800 million/year during MOX plant operation) and even Congress is smart enough not to waste that much more of our money on this massive debacle.
—-
SRS Watch has released a new update on the MOX Boondoggle – April 29, 2015
– the storm clouds over the failed project continue to gatherIn this update – linked here:
<span “font-size:12.0pt;line-height:=”” 107%”=””>— SRS Watch Again Requests Validated MOX Cost Analysis from AREVA and CB&I AREVA MOX Services, No Response Expected
— DOE Set to End Long-Delayed Plutonium Supplemental EIS Process with No Decision; Document “under departmental review” to be terminated with no “preferred alternative,” harming MOX
— FOIA Request Filed by SRS Watch for DOE Plutonium Cost Study Sent to Congress on April 22; Aerospace Corporation cost document must be released in full
— Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) Alerted to Possibly Faulty Embed Plates for MOX plant – will the NRC investigate or ignore?
— Rumors on MOX Plant Construction Problems Continue – With Only One (1) On-Site NRC Inspector, Who is Investigating and Who is Properly Monitoring Overall MOX plant Construction? With the NRC inspecting only a small sample of only some components, CB&I AREVA MOX Services is self-regulating its own work!
Update linked here
—–
Though DOE is slowly releasing more cost information, CB&I AREVA MOX Services still adamantly refuses to release any validated MOX life-cycle cost analysis it has for the MOX project it has so badly managed.
Habitual failure to ever release its own cost analysis validated by external, credible parties means that anything that AREVA or CB&I has to say about any aspect of costs for MOX construction, start-up or operation has no basis and should be ignored. We now feel that they have no life-cycle cost estimate for any aspect of the project. If they do, AREVA must release it. If not, their already low credibility will sink further.
See request for validated MOX life-cycle cost to AREVA, Inc. North America CEO and president here and for request to the VP of the “Backend Division North America” click here.
Letter to David Del Vecchio, president, CB&I AREVA MOX Services
In a rather desperate response to the summary of costs by Aerospace, VP David Jones has written about why the experimental weapon-grade MOX fuel project is so great but his totally ignoring costs issues sticks out a like a big, embarrassing sore thumb. Quch! Mr. Jones, we suggest that you give it another shot and quote in your next article from AREVA’s validated, public cost estimate for the MOX plant construction, start-up and operation.
By the way, all the AREVA lobbying on the Hill with unions only confirms that the MOX project is a parochial jobs program. AREVA, be careful with that approach in your desperate efforts to save the MOX boondoggle.
NRC letter to SRS Watch, April 1, 2015 – admitting that only certain parts of the MOX plant are being inspected. So, is anyone adequately inspecting the MOX plant construction? With only one (1!) on-site, resiodent inspector, how can the NRC be doing a though job? Sounds like NRC inspection is cursory at best and excludes many parts of MOX construction.