March, 16 2009, 02:18pm EDT

For Immediate Release
Contact:
Tom Clements, 803-834-3084
Nick Berning, 202-222-0748
DOE's Plans to Use Plutonium Fuel (MOX) Jolted by Duke Energy's Withdrawal From Program
Future of MOX Program Again in Doubt as DOE Now Has No Nuclear Reactors to Use the Controversial Fuel
COLUMBIA, S.C.
The troubled plan by the Department of Energy (DOE) to use nuclear
fuel made from surplus plutonium was recently dealt a grave blow with
the loss of all reactors that had been expected to use the fuel.
Duke Energy Corporation has allowed its contract to use the
controversial mixed oxide fuel (MOX) in four Duke reactors in North and
South Carolina to lapse, throwing into question the survivability of a
program that has stumbled from one problem to another over the last
decade.
In its annual filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(SEC) on February 27, 2009, Duke revealed that the contract to use MOX
had "automatically terminated on December 1, 2008" after a failed
attempt to renegotiate the contract with Shaw AREVA MOX Services (MOX
Services), contracted by DOE to carry out the MOX program. Duke has
said it "is interested in receiving a future proposal from MOX Services
for the use of MOX fuel," but right now the planned use in the Catawba
and McGuire reactors has been terminated.
Due to this negative turn of events for the misguided and costly MOX
program, the public interest organization Friends of the Earth is again
calling for the program to be terminated once and for all.
"Given the lack of reactors to use the plutonium fuel and ongoing
problems over the last decade with this program, it's past time for
Congress to pull the plug and halt construction of the MOX plant at the
Savannah River Site," said Tom Clements, Southeastern Nuclear Campaign
Coordinator with Friends of the Earth in Columbia, South Carolina.
A DOE official has informed Friends of the Earth that DOE is
speaking with three utilities about possible MOX use and that Duke may
reenter into negotiations. It is believed that the Tennessee Valley
Authority could be interested, though, like other utilities, it would
have to conduct a lengthy MOX test to validate use of the fuel.
"The events around the loss of the Duke reactors should serve as a
red flag to other utilities that their participation in the troubled
plutonium program will be fraught with risks and obstacles," Clements
said.
Friends of the Earth and the Union of Concerned Scientists revealed
in August 2008 that a test of MOX fuel in Duke's Catawba-1 reactor had
failed due to abnormal fuel assembly performance and the that the "lead
test assemblies" (LTAs) were pulled from the reactor after only two of
the necessary three 18-month irradiation cycles. The failure of this
test, the groups claimed, left DOE without the required information
necessary to certify with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission the
performance of the fuel, being tested for the first time with weapons
plutonium.
It is unknown what impact the failed LTA test has had on Duke's
decision to withdraw from the MOX program but DOE's lack of
guaranteeing a reliable schedule for MOX delivery, due to the failed
MOX test and continuous delays in the project, have likely caused Duke
to reconsider use of the fuel. Such fuel made from high-quality weapons
plutonium has never been used before.
The test MOX fuel had been manufactured with U.S. weapons plutonium
shipped from the Los Alamos National Laboratory via Charleston, S.C. to
a now-closed French MOX plant (Cadarche), making a repeat of the
54-month irradiation test difficult. Irradiated fuel pins were
evidently removed from failed MOX test assembles stored in the Catawba
spent fuel pool and shipped to the Oak Ridge National Laboratory for
testing. Information on analysis of the test fuel is not available. No
matter which reactors use MOX, the test will have to be repeated for
three 18-month cycles, causing further uncertainty, delays, and cost
escalation.
Despite the lack of reactors to use the plutonium fuel, MOX Services
is continuing to use taxpayer dollars to construct a $5-billion factory
at the Savannah River Site (SRS) in South Carolina to make the fuel
from 34 metric tons of "surplus" weapons-grade plutonium.
On March 4, 2009, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) release
a report entitled Department of Energy: Contract and Project Management
Concerns at the National Nuclear Security Administration and Office of
Environmental Management (https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-09-406T),
which underscores potential problems in reliably delivering MOX fuel to
a utility. Concerning the MOX plant at SRS, GAO stated that "the
project's schedule, in addition to other problems, does not adhere to a
key practice that is fundamental to having a sufficiently reliable
schedule-specifically, MFFF project staff have not conducted a risk
analysis on their current schedule using statistical techniques. ...
Consequently, NNSA cannot adequately state its level of confidence in
meeting the MFFF project's completion date, and NNSA's schedule for the
project therefore may not be reliable." Thus, utilities are nervous if
their need for a reliable schedule for fuel delivery can be met.
Friends of the Earth has also been informed by a DOE official that
DOE offered Duke conventional enriched uranium (LEU) fuel if it could
not meet a MOX delivery schedule but negotiations for that LEU fuel did
not produce positive results before the Duke MOX contract expired on
December 1.
Notes:
Duke Energy Corporation "Form 10-K" annual report filed with the SEC, Feb. 27, 2009
https://idea.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1326160/000119312509041096/d10k.htm
"In 1999, Duke Energy Carolinas entered into a contract with Shaw
AREVA MOX Services (MOX Services; formerly Duke COGEMA Stone &
Webster, LLC) to purchase mixed-oxide fuel for use in the McGuire and
Catawba nuclear reactors. Under this contract, beginning in 2007, MOX
Services would fabricate batches of mixed-oxide fuel from stockpiles of
plutonium derived from surplus weapons at a facility under construction
at the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Savannah River site in Aiken,
South Carolina. Mixed oxide fuel is similar to conventional uranium
fuel. Following review and approval by the NRC, four MOX fuel lead
assemblies, fabricated in France, were irradiated for two fuel cycles
(approximately three years) in Unit 1 of the Catawba Nuclear Station.
In 2008, Duke Energy Carolinas and MOX Services engaged in discussions
to renegotiate the terms of the contract prior to its expiration on
December 1, 2008. The parties were unable to reach agreement and the
contract automatically terminated on December 1, 2008. Duke Energy
Carolinas has communicated to MOX Services that it continues to support
the objectives of the surplus weapons disposition program and is
interested in receiving a future proposal from MOX Services for the use
of MOX fuel." (page 14)
FOE-UCS news release on Failed MOX test in Dukes Catawba Reactor, August 4, 2008:
https://www.foe.org/nuclear-fuel-test-failure-raises-concerns
and
https://www.ucsusa.org/news/press_release/nuclear-fuel-test-failure-0140....
UCS-FOE 4-page Backgrounder of August 4, 2008 on Failed MOX Test in
Duke's Catawba Reactor - "AREVA Fuel Assembly Problems Doom DOE
Plutonium Fuel Test" - available on request
For Duke's June 10, 2008 report to the NRC, with first public
mention of failed MOX test, go to the NRC's ADAMS digital library and
search for "ML081650181" at www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams/web-based.html.
For an April 2008 AREVA presentation that discusses the abnormal
fuel assembly growth problem, go to NRC's ADAMS digital library and
search for "ML081300390."
Shaw Areva MOX Services October 18, 2008 solicitation "To All
Nuclear Utilities in the USA" for more reactors to use MOX available on
request.
Friends of the Earth fights for a more healthy and just world. Together we speak truth to power and expose those who endanger the health of people and the planet for corporate profit. We organize to build long-term political power and campaign to change the rules of our economic and political systems that create injustice and destroy nature.
(202) 783-7400LATEST NEWS
Trump Blockade of Venezuela, Murders on High Seas Violate International Law: UN Experts
"The illegal use of force, and threats to use further force at sea and on land, gravely endanger the human right to life and other rights in Venezuela and the region."
Dec 24, 2025
Experts at the United Nations on Wednesday issued a scathing rebuke to US President Donald Trump's aggression toward Venezuela, saying attempts to impose an oil blockade based on US-imposed sanctions and a series of bombings of alleged drug-trafficking vessels at sea are clear violations of international law.
“There is no right to enforce unilateral sanctions through an armed blockade,” said the UN experts.
According to their statement:
A blockade is a prohibited use of military force against another country under article 2(4) of the UN Charter. “It is such a serious use of force that it is also expressly recognized as illegal armed aggression under the General Assembly’s 1974 Definition of Aggression,” the experts said.
“As such, it is an armed attack under article 51 of the Charter – in principle giving the victim State a right of self-defence,” they said.
“The illegal use of force, and threats to use further force at sea and on land, gravely endanger the human right to life and other rights in Venezuela and the region,” the experts said.
Aggression is a crime attracting universal jurisdiction under international law, which gives all countries the power to prosecute it, although the most senior government leaders retain immunity from foreign prosecution while still in office.
The experts behind the joint statement were: Ben Saul, Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms while countering terrorism; George Katrougalos, Independent Expert on the promotion of a democratic and equitable international order; Surya Deva, Special Rapporteur on the right to development; and Gina Romero, Special Rapporteur on the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association.
Their statement notes that the US sanctions imposed on Venezuela may be "unlawful" because they are "disproportionate and punitive" under international statute. It is alleged that violations of these sanctions that the Trump administration has used to justify the blockade.
"The threat is not Venezuela. The threat is the US government." —Venezuela UN Ambassador Samuel Moncada
The aggression of the US government toward Venezuela was also rebuked at an emergency meeting of the UN Security Council on Tuesday, with China, Russia, Cuba, Colombia, and others backing Venezuela's call for an end to the series of criminal boat bombings against alleged drug traffickers in the Caribbean and eastern Pacific and the unlawful seizure of oil tankers as a way to coerce the government of President Nicolas Maduro.
Venezuela's UN Ambassador Samuel Moncada equated Trump's Dec. 16 order that the US was establishing a "total and complete blockade of all sanctioned oil tankers" coming into or out of Venezuela an admission of "a crime of aggression" by the US president, who Moncada said wants to “turn back the clock of history 200 years to establish a colony" in the Latin American country.
Moncada characterized the recent US seizure of two oil tankers in international waters as "worse than piracy" and "robbery carried out by military force," warning that such brazen acts set "an extremely serious precedent for the security and navigation of international trade" in the region and worldwide.
"We are in the presence of a power that acts outside of international law," he said of the US delegation, "demanding that Venezuelans vacate our country and hand it over. We are talking about pillaging, looting, and recolonization of Venezuela."
During his comments to the council, Mike Waltz, the US Representative to the UN, defended Trump's policies by calling the threat of "transnational terrorist and criminal groups" the "single most serious threat" in the hemisphere. Waltz repeatedly claimed, without providing evidence, that Maduro's government is part of a criminal gang called "Cartel de Los Soles," which Moncada said was "ridiculous" as the group is "non-existent," an invention of the Trump administration.
Human rights groups, UN experts, and scholars of international have all stated that Trump's extrajudicial targeting of alleged drug boats—which have now left over 100 people killed—are nothing short of "murder" on the high seas.
In their Wednesday statement, the four UN experts said the killings at sea ordered by Trump "amount to violations of the right to life," citing the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which the US government ratified in 1992.
The experts called on all UN member states "to urgently take all feasible measures to stop the blockade and illegal killings" by the US government, "including through diplomatic protest, General Assembly resolutions, and peaceful counter-measures—and bring perpetrators justice."
“Collective action by States is essential to uphold international law,” they said. “Respect for the rule of law, sovereignty, non-use of force, non-intervention, and the peaceful settlement of disputes are essential to preserving peace and stability worldwide.”
In his remarks, Moncada said Venezuela would defend itself against aggression but did not consider itself at war with the United States.
"Let it be clear once and for all that there is no war in the Caribbean, there is no international armed conflict, nor is there a non-international one, which is why it is absurd for the US government to seek to justify its actions by applying the rules of war," Moncada told the council.
"The threat is not Venezuela," he said. "The threat is the US government."
Keep ReadingShow Less
YouTube, TikTok Deleted ‘60 Minutes’ CECOT Clips Amid Paramount Takedown Push
The segment on the notorious torture prison—where the Trump administration has been unlawfully deporting Venezuelans—went viral on social media after being inadvertently aired in Canada.
Dec 23, 2025
Websites including YouTube and TikTok this week removed posts of a CBS News "60 Minutes" segment on a notorious prison in El Salvador, where Trump the administration has been illegally deporting Venezuelan immigrants, after being notified that publishing the clip violated parent company's copyright.
The segment on the Terrorism Confinement Center (CECOT)—which was intended to air on Sunday's episode of "60 Minutes"—was pulled by right-wing CBS News editor-in-chief Bari Weiss, who claimed that the story "was not ready" for broadcast, despite thorough editing and clearance by key company officials.
“Our story was screened five times and cleared by both CBS attorneys and Standards and Practices," said "60 Minutes" correspondent Sharyn Alfonsi, who reported the segment. “It is factually correct. In my view, pulling it now, after every rigorous internal check has been met, is not an editorial decision, it is a political one.”
The segment—which can still be viewed on sites including X—was shared by social media users after a Canadian network received and broadcast an original version of the "60 Minutes" episode containing the CECOT piece prior to CBS pulling the story. The social media posts containing the segment were reportedly removed after CBS parent company Paramount Skydance filed copyright claims.
A CBS News representative said that “Paramount’s content protection team is in the process of routine take down orders for the unaired and unauthorized segment.”
Weiss—who also founded and still edits the Paramount Skydance-owned Free Press—has faced criticism for other moves, including presiding over the removal of parts of a previous "60 Minutes" interview with President Donald Trump regarding potential corruption stemming from his family’s massive cryptocurrency profits.
On Tuesday, Axios reported that Weiss is planning a broad overhaul of standards and procedures at the network, where she was hired by Paramount Skydance CEO and Trump supporter David Ellison in October, despite a lack of broadcasting experience.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Israeli Defense Minister Tries to Walk Back Vow to 'Never Leave Gaza,' Build Settlements
The remarks drew critical responses, including from other Israelis and the White House.
Dec 23, 2025
Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz "said the silent part out loud" on Tuesday, then promptly tried to walk back his comments that his country would not only never leave the Gaza Strip, but also reestablish settlements in the decimated exclave.
Israel evacuated Jewish settlements in Gaza two decades ago, but some officials have pushed for ethnically cleansing the strip of Palestinians and recolonizing it, particularly since the Hamas-led October 7, 2023 attack and the devastating Israeli assault that followed.
The Times of Israel on Tuesday translated Katz's remarks—made during an event about expanding Beit El, a Jewish settlement in the illegally occupied West Bank—from Hebrew to English:
"With God's help, when the time comes, also in northern Gaza, we will establish Nahal pioneer groups in place of the settlements that were evacuated," he said. "We'll do it in the right way, at the appropriate time."
Katz was referring to the Nahal military unit that, in part, lets youths combine pioneering activities with military service. In the past, many of the outposts established by the unit went on to evolve into full-fledged settlements.
"We are deep inside Gaza, and we will never leave Gaza—there will be no such thing," Katz said. "We are here to defend and to prevent what happened from happening again."
The so-called peace plan for Gaza that US President Donald Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu announced at the White House in late September notably states that "Israel will not occupy or annex Gaza," and "the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) will withdraw based on standards, milestones, and timeframes linked to demilitarization."
Gadi Eisenkot, a former IDF chief of staff who launched a new political party a few months ago, responded to Katz on social media, writing in Hebrew, "While the government votes with one hand in favor of the Trump plan, it sells myths with the other hand about isolated settlement nuclei in the strip."
"Instead of strengthening security and bringing about an enlistment law that will bolster the IDF, the government, driven by narrow political considerations, continues to scatter irresponsible and empty declarations that only harm Israel's standing in the world," he added.
The White House was also critical of Katz's comments, with an unnamed official saying that "the more Israel provokes, the less the Arab countries want to work with them."
"The United States remains fully committed to President Trump's 20-point peace plan, which was agreed to by all parties and endorsed by the international community," the official continued. "The plan envisions a phased approach to security, governance, and reconstruction in Gaza. We expect all parties to adhere to the commitments they made under the 20-point plan."
Later Tuesday, Katz's office said that "the minister of defense's remarks regarding the integration of Nahal units in the northern Gaza Strip were made solely in a security context. The government has no intention of establishing settlements in the Gaza Strip. The minister of defense emphasized the central principle of border defense in every arena: The IDF is the first and last line of defense for Israel's citizens, and the state of Israel relies for its protection solely on it and on the security forces."
Katz became defense minister in November 2024, just weeks before the International Criminal Court issued arrest warrants for his fired predecessor, Yoav Gallat, and Netanyahu over Israel's assault on and blockade of Gaza. When Katz took on the new role after serving as foreign minister, Palestine defenders accused the prime minister of swapping one "genocidal lunatic" for another.
Israel faces an ongoing genocide case at the International Court of Justice for its mass slaughter of Palestinians in Gaza. As of Tuesday, local officials put the death toll since October 2023 at 70,942, with another 171,195 Palestinians wounded, though global experts warn the true tallies are likely far higher.
At least 406 of those confirmed deaths have occurred since Israel and Hamas agreed to a ceasefire that took effect October 10. In a Monday letter demanding action from the White House, dozens of Democratic US lawmakers noted Israel's "continued bombardment against civilians, destruction of property, and insufficient delivery of humanitarian aid."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular


