I'd like to thank both the chairman and the ranking member of the subcommittee for the opportunity to discuss an important problem in our Nation's nuclear security infrastructure and for their support of this amendment. The amendment would reduce funding for the mixed oxide fuel program at the Department of Energy by approximately $17 million and redirect it to the National Nuclear Security Administration's Global Threat Reduction Initiative. Such a redirection of funds would provide for greater security and be a wiser investment of taxpayer dollars. If there is one thing we can all agree on, Mr. Chairman, it is that dollars are scarce in Washington. And with this in mind, I'm concerned about the amount of money that has been spent on the mixed oxide fuel program, known as MOX, at the DOE. Under an agreement signed by the United States and Russia in 2000, both countries agreed to dispose of excess weapons-grade plutonium by blending it with uranium to create mixed oxide fuel. The intent was to use it as a fuel in civilian nuclear reactors. Subsequently, the Department of Energy spent billions on the mixed oxide fuel project. The fuel is intended for a market segment that has yet to emerge, and according to a report from the Government Accountability Office, the Department of Energy has had to consider offering subsidies to attract potential customers for the fuel.…
On the recordJune 5, 2012
Source
govinfo.govShare
More from Jeff Fortenberry
Mar 24, 2021
I think it is a critical new architecture for, again, establishing trust and economic well-being with continuity, using the best of the private market system with a little bit of subsidy.
Mar 24, 2021
I completely understand that, but without a specific set of examples that we know that this is a model that is scalable for development across not only Haiti, but across other regions, I am afraid that we focus on these larger structural…
Apr 16, 2021
A long time ago, I made the decision to stand by the people who grow our food, protect our country, and make our stuff. Now, for a moment, if we could put aside the ever-expanding definition of infrastructure, I think we could agree on a…





