Dr. Snyder contacted me two days ago with specific ways we can help save the U-233. Here is the text of his letter:
Dear Mr. Sorensen,
On July 26, 2010, Representative Mike Simpson of Idaho informed me that:
“While the House has not yet publicly released the Energy and Water Development Appropriations Act for FY2011, I have shared your thoughts [on terminating the U233 project at ORNL] with the House Energy and Water Appropriations Subcommittee, which has jurisdiction over this issue.”
If you ever want the chance to use this U233 in the future, contact your congressional representatives[i] today and voice your support for terminating the U233 project at ORNL.
If you represent an organization that has interest in the life-saving medical isotopes that could be recovered from this U233, please contact these representatives on behalf of the members of your organization.
If you represent an organization that has interest in the future of energy production (and keeping all of our nuclear options open), please contact these representatives on behalf of the members of your organization.
If you have any questions about why I am requesting your support in this effort, please contact me by e-mail or phone.
Respectfully,
John R. Snyder, Ph.D.
Retired (2009) Commercialization Manager, Idaho National Laboratory
213 Gettysburg Lane
Idaho Falls, ID 83404
208-680-9127[i] Other members of the House Energy and Water Appropriations Subcommittee who have stakeholders interested in the U233 at ORNL are:
Lincloln Davis (TN), Member (Stakeholder is Department of Energy, Oak Ridge National Laboratory)
Steve Israel (NY), Member (Stakeholders are Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center and Albert Einstein College of Medicine)
Peter Visclosky (IN), Chair (Stakeholder is Department of Energy)
Zach Wamp (TN), Member (Stakeholder is Department of Energy, Oak Ridge National Laboratory)
Members of the House Committee on Appropriations who have stakeholders in the U233 at ORNL are:
Maurice Hinchey (NY), Member (Stakeholders are Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center and Albert Einstein College of Medicine)
Jesse Jackson, Jr (IL), Member (Stakeholder is NorthStar Nuclear Medicine, Madison, WI and Naperville, IL)
Mark Kirk (IL), Member (Stakeholder is NorthStar Nuclear Medicine, Madison, WI and Naperville, IL)
Nita Lowey (NY), Member (Stakeholders are Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center and Albert Einstein College of Medicine)
David Obey (WI), Chairman, Ex-Officio Member, House Subcommittee on Energy and Water Development, (Stakeholder is NorthStar Nuclear Medicine, Madison, WI and Naperville, IL)
Jose Serrano (NY), Member (Stakeholders are Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center and Albert Einstein College of Medicine)
Carolyn Maloney (NY), is Chair of the House Joint Economic Committee (Stakeholders are Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center and Albert Einstein College of Medicine)
The following Senators may have influence in enacting the proposed language:
Senators Harry Reid (NV) and Orin Hatch (UT) are co-sponsors of Senate Bill S.3060, Thorium Independence and Security Act of 2010
Senator Lamar Alexander (TN), Member, Senate Subcommittee on Energy and Water Development, (Stakeholder is Department of Energy, Oak Ridge National Laboratory)
Senator Jeff Bingaman (NM), Chairman, Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources (Stakeholder is Department of Energy)
Senator Bob Corker (TN), Member, Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, (Stakeholder is Department of Energy, Oak Ridge National Laboratory)
Senator Herb Kohl (WI), Member, Senate Appropriations Committee (Stakeholder is NorthStar Nuclear Medicine, Madison, WI and Naperville, IL)
[ii] Specific language recommended for the Energy and Water Development Appropriations Act for FY2011 is: “The Secretary of Energy shall direct that the Uranium-233 Material Downblending and Disposition Project at Oak Ridge National Laboratory be terminated and that the uranium-233 be promptly transferred to safe, secure, interim storage at another DOE site.”
If you are a constituent of any of these representatives and senators, please get in touch with them to support the language to save the U-233.
Frank Munger reports on the effort:
Campaign to save the U-233 stockpile
I wrote a short example letter that others might use when contacting their Congress persons. You can view my letter (which you are welcome to copy or mine for ideas and references for your own letter) at the following URL:
http://bit.ly/daq87r
I thank and aplaud Mr. Steinhaus for writing the sample letter. However, the word “should” is not strong enough for directing the Secretary of Energy to terminate this project. I urge use of “shall” instead.
Thank you to Mr. Steinhaus for writing the sample letter. I plan to write my congressmen on this issue. In addition, with regards to LFTRs in general, can anyone comment on the one or two key themes we can ask of our congressmen ? I’m thinking that we want to make developing this technology as easy as possible for private industry. What are the impediments. e.g. Too much regulation ? Regulation focused on LWRs that doesn’t “work” with respect to LFTRs. Can someone point me in the right direction ? Thank you !!!
Seems that CWI at The INL is already shipping what u233 we have at the INL to Nevada already. Anywhere but destroyed.
Mr. Thesling,
My recommendation is to focus on terminating the U-233 Project at ORNL. We can make a simple, timely and compelling case for termination of the Project and interim storage of the U-233 at another DOE site. This action would give the thorim fuel community time to make the case for DOE R&D funding of LFTR.
Ask your congressman to support the following language in the FY2011 Energy and Water Appropriations Bill for the Department of Energy:
“The Secretary of Energy shall direct that the Uranium-233 Material Downblending and Disposition Project at Oak Ridge National Laboratory be terminated and that the uranium-233 be promptly transferred to safe, secure, interim storage at another DOE site.”
The case for termination is…
At a time of record federal government spending and budget deficits, Congress has the opportunity to demonstrate its willingness to curb unnecessary and wasteful spending by terminating the U-233 Project at ORNL — to the tune of about $400 million. There is a less expensive, safe, long-term storage option for U-233 that does not “waste” the U-233. The U-233 shipped from INL to NTS sets this precedent.
At a time of escalating fear of terrorism, Congress has the opportunity to provide greater safeguards for a Special Nuclear Material by terminating the U-233 Project at ORNL and transfering this SNM to safe, secure, interim storage at another DOE site. Is the DNFSB willing to accept delays until 2021 (latest estimated completion date for the Project) in meeting the intent of DNFSB Recommendation 97-1? This question is under review by the current Board.
At a time of escalating unemployment, Congress has the opportunity to invest in job growth rather than funding dead-end jobs in “waste” disposal by terminating the U-233 Project at ORNL and giving government and industry the time to explore the future of U-233 use in medical isotope recovery and additional nucler fuel cycle options.
If we focus on this battle and win, we will live to fight again, i.e., for LFTR.
Thank you,
John