May 29, 2014

GRAHAM VOWS TO FIGHT ‘IRRESPONSIBLE’ MOX DECISION

By ExchangeMonitor

Attempting not to get “overly nasty,” South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham (R) ripped into the Obama Administration’s decision to put the Mixed Oxide Fuel Fabrication Facility project into cold standby, arguing at a Senate Armed Services Emerging Threats and Capabilities Subcommittee hearing yesterday that MOX was the only viable option for disposing of 34 metric tons of weapons-grade plutonium. “You’re breaking the direction given to you by the Congress without any viable alternative,” Graham told National Nuclear Security Administration nonproliferation chief Anne Harrington yesterday. “This is incredibly irresponsible. It’s going to cost us more money. It’s going to create problems with weapons-grade plutonium in the hands of the Russians at a time we need no more problems with the Russians. So I just promise you this will not go away and it will not be allowed to stand, because it is so, so irresponsible.”

Harrington said that an order to put the facility hadn’t been given yet, but she said it would be. The Administration said last month that it was putting the project in cold standby because of the rising costs of the project, but Harrington emphasized that a final decision on MOX had not been made. “Any construction work that is performed would only be in support of placing the MOX facility and equipment in a safe and secure state, and most importantly … recoverable state,” she said. “We have very much the interest of the U.S. taxpayer in mind here, and the option of moving forward with this project is not off the table, but that is part of what is under consideration right now.” South Carolina has sued to prevent DOE from using FY 2014 funds to put the project in cold standby, and Graham told NS&D Monitor after the hearing that he is also planning to take action to ensure the project moves forward. “Basically we’re going to use the power of the purse. We’re going to fund this program and direct them to keep construction going. We’re going to reject the idea that it’s wise in terms of financial savings to stop the program because there is no viable alternative.”

Comments are closed.