UPF GETS BOOST IN FY13 BUDGET,
CMRR-NF PROJECT DEFERRED
Shrinking federal budgets forced the National Nuclear
Security Administration to pick between its two
multi-billion-dollar construction projects, and the winner
is the Uranium Processing Facility planned for the Y-12
National Security Complex. As it rolled out its Fiscal Year
2013 budget request yesterday, the Obama Administration
said it planned to “defer” construction on the Chemistry
and Metallurgy Research Replacement-Nuclear Facility
slated for Los Alamos National Laboratory for “at least
five years” while accelerating work on UPF. “Within these
budget realities it was very clear we couldn’t do both
things in parallel at the same time,” Energy Secretary
Steven Chu told reporters yesterday. “We address the ones
that we thought were the most critical.”
As recently as last year, both projects were considered
cornerstones of the Obama Administration’s plan to
modernize the nation’s nuclear arsenal and weapons
complex, but their rising price tags—combined with fiscal
belt-tightening across the federal government—forced the
agency to rethink its plans. In the last few years, the
estimated cost to build both facilities has nearly doubled.
The price tag for CMRR-NF is estimated between $3.7 and
$5.8 billion, while UPF is estimated to cost between $4.2
and $6.5 billion and an Army Corps of Engineers report
completed last year indicated that the cost is likely to end
up between $6.5 and $7.5 billion.
Lawmakers Question Choices
The decision is sure to be criticized by Congressional
Republicans, who have sought to hold the President to the
modernization promises he made during Senate debate on
the New START Treaty in 2010. At the time, CMRR-NF
and UPF were considered vital to the modernization effort,
and in a statement last week, Rep. Michael Turner (ROhio),
the chairman of the House Armed Services Strategic
Forces Subcommittee, accused the President of “changing the terms of the Senate’s ratification of the
treaty.” A Turner spokesman declined to comment on the
FY2013 budget release, but said the lawmaker still plans
to introduce legislation this week to address the modernization
commitments. On the other side of the aisle, Sen.
Jeff Bingaman (D-N.M.) also questioned the about-face on
the project. “For years we have been told the CMRR
nuclear facility was necessary. Now we’re being told there
may be alternatives. I look forward to hearing more from
the administration about this change in plans,” Bingaman
said in a statement.
Before zeroing out CMRR-NF funding in FY2013,
previous budget documents indicated that NNSA had
expected to request $300 million for the project, but signs
of Congressional discontent—at least among appropriators— with the project begun to appear last year. In
FY2012, Congressional appropriators provided only $200
million of the Administration’s $300 million request and
explicitly prohibited the lab from beginning to prepare the
site for construction in FY2012. The Administration said
it would avoid spending $1.8 billion from 2013 to 2017 on
the project, but experts believe if the NNSA ultimately
decides to build the facility, the delays will add more costs
to the final price tag. As for UPF, the Administration is
requesting $340 million for the project, nearly $180
million more than was appropriated for the project in
FY2012 and $150 million more than the agency had
projected spending a year ago. That move was applauded
by Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.), the ranking member
of the Senate Energy and Water Appropriations Subcommittee. “Modernizing the nation’s nuclear weapons
complex is of critical importance to our nation’s defense.
I look forward to seeing a detailed plan for doing it on time
and within budget,” Alexander said.
Looking at the ‘Big Picture’
It’s not clear if the NNSA will ever build the CMRR-NF
as previously envisioned. While NNSA Administrator Tom
D’Agostino stressed that the decision was a deferral and
not a cancellation of the project, he said the decision would
give the agency time to evaluate how to approach replacing
the lab’s plutonium facility, which was built in 1978, is
currently undergoing significant seismic upgrades, and will
reach the end of its expected lifespan in several decades. “It’s very clear to us, if we’re going to get in the business
of building billion dollar nuclear facilities that we need to
take into consideration the big picture,” D’Agostino said. “Because of where we are financially this affords us the
opportunity to do that and it also allows us to take a look
at the existing plutonium capability we have that doesn’t
rely solely on the old CMR [Chemistry and Metallurgy
Research] facility.”
NNSA Defense Programs chief Don Cook said the increased
funding for UPF would allow an acceleration of construction work on the project, particularly the massive
amounts of concrete and reinforcing bar that will be
needed. The increase “gets us the most efficient way to put
the base build facility in place,” Cook said. The installation
of tooling and equipment that will allow the agency to
move out of the 9212 facility will remain on its previous
schedule and will begin in 2019, Cook said. According to
the budget request, the facility would be operational in the
fourth quarter of 2022. The NNSA won’t commit to a
baseline for the project until it reaches 90 percent design
maturity at the end of FY2012 or the beginning of
FY2013. “We’ll have this logic built into the baseline
when we set the price,” Cook said.
Plutonium Options Drive Decision
Deferring the CMRR-NF project was easier than postponing
UPF, D’Agostino said, because there were options to
assume much of the facility’s mission. He said the agency
will make use of the recently built Radiological Laboratory
and Utility Office Building—that was to stand next to the
CMRR-NF at Los Alamos’ Technical Area 55—for
materials characterization and analytical chemistry and
also lean on Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory’s
Superblock facility. CMRR-NF was also designed to
include a storage vault for plutonium from Los Alamos’ plutonium facility, but the Administration said efforts to
process, package and dispose of excess nuclear materials
and reduce material at risk in the plutonium facility would
be accelerated through a $35 million funding boost in
FY2013. The Device Assembly Facility at the Nevada
National Security Site also could be used to stage plutonium
for future uses, the Administration said. “The country
had options on the plutonium side,” D’Agostino said. “It
didn’t have any options on the uranium side.”
Y-12’s 9212 facility, where the nation’s enriched uranium
processing efforts are housed, is widely regarded as being
in dismal shape, and there is nowhere else in the weapons
complex that the NNSA could move those processes,
officials said. Cook described the facility as “used up” during a conference call with reporters yesterday. “We
don’t have any option not to get out of 9212,” Cook said. “We need to.” D’Agostino said a review of the nation’s
uranium and plutonium capabilities confirmed those
opinions. “We took a look at our capabilities, both in the
plutonium side and the uranium side, and it’s very clear
when you do that that there is a clear and urgent need to
move the functions we have in the 9212 building in
uranium work, move it out of there,” D’Agostino said. “Because that’s a high risk activity, the Defense [Nuclear
Facilities Safety] Board has told us that, we understand
that, so we had to get moving on that.”
CMRR-NF Work to Continue Through FY2012
Cook said design work will still continue on CMRR-NF
for the remainder of FY2012 so that the work is not lost.
He said part of the $200 million appropriated for the
project in FY2012 also was destined for the RLUOB,
which is expected to be completely outfitted by April of
this year. “It’s the most prudent thing to do,” Cook said. “At this point we have a deferral for at least five years.
What we want to make sure we do is wrap up the design,
get this to a point where it could be taken forward into the
future, modified as need be, rather than just stop the design
work.”
—Todd Jacobson
|