Federal report calls for MOX cost analysis

  • Follow Metro

COLUMBIA — Federal officials overseeing a South Carolina project to turn weapons-grade plutonium into commercial nuclear reactor fuel should have a better handle on why costs have ballooned by billions of dollars, according to the General Accountability Office.

In a report released Thurs­day, GAO officials wrote that the U.S. Department of Energy needs to analyze cost increases for the program to produce mixed-oxide fuel, or MOX.

The MOX plant being built at Savannah River Site would be the first of its kind in the United States to create fuel from weapons-grade plutonium and represents an international nonproliferation effort.

Construction on the MOX plant began in 2007, but the project has undergone years of delays as its costs have continued to rise. Last year, the GAO said the project was more than three years behind its 2016 completion deadline and at least $3 billion over budget.

The National Nuclear Security Administration, a semi-autonomous agency within the Energy Depart­ment, manages the MOX project. In its report issued Thursday, the General Accountability Office criticized the agency for not analyzing the origins of cost increases.

“Without a root cause analysis, it is uncertain whether NNSA will be able to accurately identify underlying causes of the cost increases for the MOX facility,” auditors wrote. Because NNSA hasn’t done such work, the report went on, the agency “cannot provide assurance that it has correctly identified the underlying causes to ensure that they will not lead to further cost increases as the projects move forward.”

Officials have said rising projects costs are partly because some contractors were hired before designs were complete. As a result, the NNSA has said, some costs have averaged 60 percent higher than estimated.

The Obama administration has slowed funding on the project, asking Congress last year for $320 million in its 2014 budget. In its budget request, the administration wrote that its high costs “may make the project unaffordable” and pledged to look for different ways to dispose of plutonium.

Last summer, project contractors received warnings that could be the precursors for layoffs, job losses the signatories note could have wide-reaching economic effects on the area.

Citing newspaper reports projecting that 500 layoffs at MOX would cost five surrounding counties about $42 million in payroll, a bipartisan group of South Carolina’s Washington representatives wrote to Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz, inviting him to come see firsthand what is happening at the site.

NNSA officials did not immediately return messages seeking comment. In an e-mail, Sierra Club adviser Tom Clements, a longtime critic of the MOX project, said Thursday that more transparency is needed on the costly project.

“There is ample blame to go around for this shocking situation,” Clements said. “It’s time for the cover-up of MOX costs to end and DOE’s National Nuclear Security Administration must immediately release their cost estimate for the mismanaged MOX program so that it can be subjected to public scrutiny.”

Comments (2) Add comment
ADVISORY: Users are solely responsible for opinions they post here and for following agreed-upon rules of civility. Posts and comments do not reflect the views of this site. Posts and comments are automatically checked for inappropriate language, but readers might find some comments offensive or inaccurate. If you believe a comment violates our rules, click the "Flag as offensive" link below the comment.
SCEagle Eye
910
Points
SCEagle Eye 02/21/14 - 12:38 am
2
0
MOX di$a$ter: end it now

This failed project shows that South Carolina politicians like $en. Lind$ey Graham and Rep. Joe Wil$on are more interested in lining the pockets of $haw AREVA MOX $ervice$ than serving the public interest by pursuing better, cheaper ways to dispose of plutonium It's way beyond time to pull the plug on the MOX madne$$ that's running up the debt and getting nowhere after 15 years of floundering.

GiantsAllDay
9578
Points
GiantsAllDay 02/21/14 - 11:03 am
2
0
OK, so the GAO did a study.

OK, so the GAO did a study. And the study concluded that the DOE needs to do a study to analyze cost increases. Holy crap. I mean, holy crap. Can anyone believe that this embarrassing project is still being funded? I will wait until Sunday when Clint Wolfe with his PhD writes a guest column, explaining it all to us uneducated numbskulls. I really wish the AC would tell him that he has worn out his welcome and is no longer a guest.

DawgnSC69
271
Points
DawgnSC69 02/21/14 - 12:50 pm
0
0
Why the cost increase?

One reason the cost increased is due to the fact our country hasn't built a nuclear facility in 3 decades which leads to the following:
1. Lack of NQA1 qualified suppliers for structures, systems, and components.
2. Lack of experienced workers for this type of work.
Every nuclear facility under construction at this time has experienced this problem.

The biggest factor IMO is The Department of Energy themselves. Those yahoos can make even a hammer and nail complicated. After all it's the federal government we're talking about here. Did anyone expect anything different?

Back to Top

Top headlines

'Do not swim' order remains in effect for Savannah River

A "do not swim" order for the Savannah River will reamin in effect while officials await lab results of an oily substance found in its waters Sunday.
Search Augusta jobs