[DNFSB LETTERHEAD]
May 28, 2004
To
the Congress of the United States:
Congress required the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board (Board) and the Secretary of Energy to submit to Congress reports on the actions taken by the Secretary of Energy in response to the proposals made in the Board’s study Plutonium Storage at the Department of Energy’s Savannah River Site, dated December 1, 2003. The first report was to be provided not later than 6 months after submission of the study (Section 3183(d) of the Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2003) and every year thereafter.
Herewith is the Board’s first annual report on the Department of Energy’s (DOE) actions on the Board’s proposals as required. For the most part, the Board believes that DOE has initiated actions to begin to address the Board’s proposals. Since these actions will not be complete until later this year, it is premature to evaluate whether DOE will agree with and implement the Board’s proposals.
While DOE is addressing the specific proposals in the Board’s study, in the Board’s view the Secretary of Energy should take a more encompassing view of the current situation with regards to the disposition and storage options for the country’s excess plutonium inventory. In its December 1, 2003 report to Congress, the Board proposed that DOE complete a study to evaluate options for plutonium storage at the Savannah River Site. This proposal was intended to achieve a broad perspective on plutonium disposition and storage.
For
extended storage, consolidation of excess plutonium into a single, robust
facility specifically designed for storage is logical from a safety, security,
and economic perspective. The Board
believes that DOE should explore alternatives (including a new facility or
processing options to reduce storage requirements) that limit the use of
multiple old facilities.
Respectfully submitted,
|
John T. Conway Chairman |
A. J. Eggenberger Vice Chairman |
|
John E. Mansfield Member |
R. Bruce Matthews Member |