 |
|
|
| | | published Tuesday, May 08, 2012 | 121 Views :: 0 Comments |
May 7, 2012
By Rob Pavey From the Augusta Chronicle
The schedule for disposing of plutonium at Savannah River Site’s mixed oxide fuel facility would be extended by two years under a new version of the 2013 National Defense Authorization Bill released Monday.
The markup released by House Armed Services Committee Chairman Howard P. “Buck” McKeon would add two years to schedules that call for the National Nuclear Security Administration to provide detailed reports on the project’s cost and operations timetable, along with key production objectives.
|
| read more.. |
|
| | | published Monday, April 30, 2012 | 192 Views :: 0 Comments |
April 30, 2012
By Rob Pavey From the Augusta Chronicle U.S. Senate budget writers followed their House counterparts this week with questions about the rising costs of the mixed oxide fuel plant under construction at Savannah River Site.
In particular, the projected annual cost of operating the facility — after it is completed — has risen from $156 million to $499 million in just two budget years, said a new draft of the 2013 Senate Energy & Water Development Appropriations bill.
The National Nuclear Security Administration, an arm of the Energy Department that manages nuclear weapons programs, “has failed to provide a sufficient justification for this increase,” the report said.
|
| read more.. |
|
| | | published Thursday, April 12, 2012 | 494 Views :: 0 Comments |
April 12, 2012
In response to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit filed by ANA member group Nuclear Watch New Mexico on March 28, the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) has released the Performance Evaluation Reports for its eight nuclear weapons sites. These reports are the government's scorecard for awarding tens of millions of dollars to nuclear weapons contractors, and were available to the public until 2009. But since that time NNSA has withheld them in a general move toward less contractor accountability.
Click the links below to download the Performance Evaluation Reports for each nuclear weapons site (PDFs) Note: the Sandia National Laboratory report is still undergoing review by the NNSA before it is released.
|
| read more.. |
|
| | | published Wednesday, March 21, 2012 | 13 Views :: 0 Comments |
Costs for the Department of Energy’s MOX program are increasing at an alarming rate. The estimated cost of MOX plant construction at the Savannah River Site has increased from $1.6 billion in FY2004 to the current $4.9 billion. The DOE’s FY2013 overall request for MOX and associated plutonium disposition programs is $887 million and the budget indicates a funding request of $3.6 billion from FY2014 to FY2017.
|
| read more.. |
|
| | | published Wednesday, February 15, 2012 | 1417 Views :: 3 Comments |
In the following op-ed, ANA member Marylia Kelley argues that the Department of Energy's nuclear weapons programs are eating up more than their fair share of the federal budget in austere times.
February 15, 2012
By Marylia Kelley
From the San Francisco Chronicle
While most federal agencies are being placed on an austerity diet, the Obama administration's 2013 budget for nuclear weapons activities is more than last year's appropriation and 20 percent higher than President Reagan's largest nuclear weapons budget at the height of the Cold War, adjusted for inflation. If fully funded, Obama's budget will be the biggest nuclear weapons budget in our nation's history.
President Obama firmly declared "America's commitment to seek the peace and security of a world without nuclear weapons" in his 2009 Prague address. The world, including me, cheered. But, Mr. President, this is not a budget that implements our solemn commitment.
|
| read more.. |
|
| | | published Monday, February 13, 2012 | 1571 Views :: 0 Comments |
for further information, contact: Susan Gordon (505) 473-1670 Katherine Fuchs (202) 544-0217 Tom Clements (803) 834-3084 for immediate release, Monday, February 13,2012
Full Press Release
The Department of Energy (DOE) nuclear weapons spending proposal released today maintains “budget-busting nuclear weapons overkill,” according to an analysis by the Alliance for Nuclear Accountability (ANA). At the same time, ANA says it under funds some programs to clean up the radioactive and toxic legacy from the Cold War. Despite ending spending for a controversial plutonium production plant, the budget request seeks nearly a third of a billion dollars in additional funding for nuclear weapons programs. Yet, it may not allow DOE to meet all its environmental obligations. ANA praised the decision to defer construction of the Chemistry and Metallurgy Research Replacement Nuclear Facility (CMRR) at Los Alamos National Lab for at least five years. “The runaway costs for an unneeded plutonium bomb plant combined with plans to build it on an earthquake fault line finally forced DOE to stop this facility,” said Susan Gordon, director of ANA. At the same time, she noted, the budget accelerates construction of the Uranium Processing Facility (UPF) in Oak Ridge, Tennessee, to manufacture other nuclear weapons components. “Instead, the UPF should be downsized and refocused on dismantling warheads and down-blending uranium,” Ms. Gordon explained.
|
| read more.. |
|
| | | published Friday, February 10, 2012 | 1873 Views :: 0 Comments |
for release February 10, 2012
For further information: Katherine Fuchs (202) 544-0217
The overriding issue for the Monday, Feb. 13 budget release is: Will the Obama Administration continue to increase funding for unnecessary nuclear programs in light of current fiscal constraints? The Alliance for Nuclear Accountability (ANA), a national network of communities downwind and downstream from U.S. nuclear facilities, is concerned that out of control spending on nuclear weapons and nuclear facilities will divert resources from legally required environmental cleanup, sustainable energy programs, and critical nonproliferation efforts. Here are some key questions that the Department of Energy (DOE) budget should address:
- In light of economic reality, will the Administration rein in funding for oversized, unnecessary nuclear facilities to produce plutonium and highly enriched uranium components for weapons? At a time when nuclear stockpiles are being cut, why does the US need expanded production capacity for plutonium pits (the fissile cores or “triggers” of nuclear weapons) and highly enriched uranium (secondaries)? The Chemistry and Metallurgy Research Replacement-Nuclear Facility would directly support production of plutonium pits, yet the JASONs determined that plutonium pits have a shelf life of 85+ years. The Uranium Processing Facility as planned is oversized and should be redesigned to dismantle warheads and down-blend uranium.
|
| read more.. |
|
| | | published Thursday, February 09, 2012 | 1074 Views :: 1 Comments |
ANA's Nonproliferation Policy Director Tom Clements comments on Rep. Markey's new bill to defund the MOX plutonium fuel program.
Feb. 9, 2012 By Rob Pavey From the Augusta Chronicle
Legislation to cut $100 billion from a “bloated” U.S. nuclear weapons budget over the next decade includes a provision to halt further funding for the National Nuclear Security Administration’s $4.8 billion mixed oxide fuel plant under construction at Savannah River Site.
The Smarter Approach to Nuclear Expenditures (SANE) Act of 2012, introduced Wednesday by U.S. Rep. Ed Markey, D-Mass., and about 30 co-sponsors, also would cut the current nuclear submarine fleet, reduce the nation’s ICBM missile inventory, delay construction of new nuclear-capable bombers and end current nuclear strike bomber missions.
|
| read more.. |
|
| | | published Friday, February 03, 2012 | 908 Views :: 0 Comments |
Tell the Department of Energy not to put nuclear bombs in power plants!
Feb. 3, 2012
The Department of Energy (DOE) is currently accepting public comments on the scope of their upcoming Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS) regarding disposing of surplus plutonium. The DOE has already held it's only public hearing for this SPEIS, but you can still make a comment until March 12th, 2012. Read the comment that ANA submitted at this hearing here.
Submit your own comment!
|
| read more.. |
|
| | | published Friday, February 03, 2012 | 941 Views :: 0 Comments |
The Alliance for Nuclear Accountability, in collaboration with our allies at the Ploughshares Fund, the Arms Control Association, and the Union of Concerned Scientists present two new fact sheets on nuclear weapons funding.
|
| read more.. |
|
|
 |
|