Precarious financial situation, contravention of laws, inaccurate national security benefits underscore risk for bailout of nuclear enrichment company
WASHINGTON, D.C. – Congressmen Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.) and Michael C. Burgess, M.D. (R-Texas) today wrote the Government Accountability Office (GAO) calling for an investigation of the Departments of Energy’s (DOE) continued support for the floundering United States Enrichment Corporation (USEC). In their letter to the GAO, the lawmakers point to USEC’s inability to avoid insolvency in the absence of continued DOE bailouts, most recently in the form of $44 million in assistance so that the company could continue work on USEC’s flawed centrifuge technology and tens of thousands of tons of free uranium transferred from the Energy Department to stave off an immediate shut down of its Kentucky enrichment facility. Additionally, the Congressmen cite the recent credit downgrading, technical problems, and inaccurate assertions about the national security benefits as reasons why the nuclear enrichment program may never reach full commercialization.
“We’ve been told this earmark is all about avoiding risk to our national security, but the real risks of this nuclear bailout is for taxpayers who will be on the hook for questionable government handouts that are worth more than the entire company,” said Rep. Markey. “The GAO should immediately commence an investigation into DOE’s ongoing support for USEC before we throw more money at a company whose junk bond status and junk technology make it better suited for the budgetary junk heap.”
“The Department of Energy has been harming the uranium mining industry for years, dumping excess uranium tails into the market to prop up a failing company that couldn't stand on its own feet. As a result, thousands of miners from Texas, New Mexico, Arizona, Wyoming, Utah, and others, have had their livelihoods put in jeopardy,” said Rep. Burgess. “It is time the Department of Energy is held accountable for their activities. This GAO report will be the first step in bringing justice for an industry still damaged by Department of Energy policies.”
A copy of the letter to the GAO can be found HERE.
In the letters, Reps. Markey and Burgess request the GAO’s investigation to examine issues including:
· The assertion that the USEC program is needed in order to fulfill a national security need appears to be inaccurate. The Department of Energy’s assertion that continuing to bail out USEC is the only way the U.S. can get the tritium needed for America’s nuclear weapons program appears to be untrue. Rep. Markey requested reports from the Congressional Research Service that dispute this claim. Additionally, it appears as if the USEC centrifuges themselves use foreign technology, raising questions as to whether even USEC is eligible to do this nuclear weapons work using DOE’s own questionable eligibility criteria.
· The Department’s recent uranium transfer announcement may violate the USEC Privatization Act and may additionally not include adequate safeguards. The USEC Privatization Act requires DOE to ensure that transfers, including the one announced May 15 to avoid shutdown of the USEC facility in Paducah, Kentucky, will not have an adverse material impact on the domestic uranium mining, conversion, or enrichment industry. The Department had to alter its long-standing standard for assessing such adverse impacts in order to enter into the agreement, agreed to transfer forms of uranium that GAO has previously concluded DOE lacked the statutory authority to transfer, and does not appear to have ensured that it has any mechanism to oversee or enforce the terms of the agreement.
· The Department of Energy and USEC may be out of compliance with other statutes, including the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA). For example, the Natural Resources Committee Democratic staff has been told that the stakeholder consultation processes required under NHPA are not being properly performed at USEC’s Ohio facility, and the Department’s current NEPA analysis appears to be based on outdated assumptions regarding the amount of uranium it plans to transfer to private entities.
