SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
For Immediate Release
October, 09 2013, 11:09am EDT
Contact:
Tom Clements, (803) 834-3084, (803) 240-7268 (cell), tclements@foe.org
Katherine Fuchs, (202) 222-0723, kfuchs@foe.org
DOE Reveals Delays in Plutonium Disposition Program
Key decisions about the Department of Energy's program on the disposal of surplus weapons plutonium face additional significant delays, according to documents released by the department. The delays mean that the fate of the troubled program to fabricate plutonium fuel, known as mixed oxide fuel or MOX, from surplus weapons material faces new uncertainties and will not be determined until well into 2014.
WASHINGTON
Key decisions about the Department of Energy's program on the disposal of surplus weapons plutonium face additional significant delays, according to documents released by the department. The delays mean that the fate of the troubled program to fabricate plutonium fuel, known as mixed oxide fuel or MOX, from surplus weapons material faces new uncertainties and will not be determined until well into 2014.
On October 4, DOE's National Nuclear Security Administration posted changes to the contract for the company reviewing environmental impacts of the plutonium disposition program. The changes indicate that important decisions on the future of the costly program have been postponed for a year and a half. The changes to the Environmental Impact Statement contract were placed on Federal Business Opportunities website. Key changes to the contract include the extended deadline and increased fees to the contractor.
The same document that indicates further delays for the MOX Environmental Impact Statement also states that the DOE's "assessment" of plutonium disposition options, which was announced as part of the FY14 budget release in April 2013, will be delayed until mid-2014. This assessment is to review practical alternatives to the MOX program and audit the spiraling cost overruns that the program has faced since its earliest days.
Though no MOX customers have been identified, DOE is currently constructing a MOX fabrication plant at DOE's Savannah River Site in South Carolina on the speculation that a utility will offer its reactors for use of the experimental MOX fuel. Due to mismanagement the estimate for construction of the MOX facility has soared from $1.8 billion in 2004 to $4.8 billion in 2008 to $7.7 billion in 2013. Friends of the Earth estimates another $22 billion is required for MOX program, making it unsustainable given the current federal budget stresses.
One leading alternative to the MOX program is disposing of the surplus plutonium as waste. This could be done by packaging the plutonium with high level radioactive waste to create a theft-deterring radiation barrier and emplacing the waste in a secure geologic repository. Documents obtained by Friends of the Earth in response to a Freedom of Information Act request indicate that disposing of the plutonium in DOE's Waste Isolation Pilot Plant in New Mexico appears to be much cheaper than MOX. Friends of the Earth supports disposal of plutonium as nuclear waste, as fabrication into MOX creates proliferation risks due to increased handling, introduction into commerce and challenges during reactor operation.
"DOE's admission that decisions about plutonium disposition have been posted until next year indicates big trouble for the mismanaged MOX program,' said Katherine Fuchs, nuclear subsidies campaigner with Friends of the Earth. "The stunning delays indicate that the skyrocketing costs, technical problems and schedules delays with MOX are catching up with the mismanaged program and could well spell its doom."
According to the NNSA contract-change notice, issuance of the "Record of Decision" on the final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement on plutonium disposition options has been delayed until April 30, 2014. After postponing release of the key document since October 2012, DOE currently lists the release of the SEIS document as being "under departmental review."
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
50+ Dems Slam Rubio Plan to Burn 500 Metric Tons of Emergency Food Aid
"This action is not only morally indefensible, but also wasteful, strategically shortsighted, and completely counter to the entirety of your work while in the Senate."
Jul 18, 2025
More than 50 congressional Democrats on Friday condemned U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio's decision to withhold and destroy nearly 500 metric tons of emergency food aid for Afghanistan and Pakistan—a move that came a month after the Trump administration's State Department abolished all overseas positions at the United States Agency for International Development.
The USAID emergency food aid—which has been stored in a warehouse in Dubai for months and will expire before the end of July—is enough to feed around 1.5 million children for a week. The aid consists of high energy biscuits that are used primarily to satisfy the immediate nutritional needs of children enduring food crises. It is now set to be incinerated.
"This action is not only morally indefensible, but also wasteful, strategically shortsighted, and completely counter to the entirety of your work while in the Senate," the Democratic lawmakers wrote in a letter to Rubio.
"Given the alarming rates of food insecurity and famine in regions like Gaza and Sudan, the decision to burn lifesaving aid produced by American farmers and paid for by American tax dollars amounts to a tragic abdication of our global humanitarian responsibilities and hurts our own global interests," the letter asserts.
Secretary Rubio is planning to withhold 500 metric tons of vital food aid that could feed 1.5 million starving children… and then incinerate the food once it expires. UNACCEPTABLE!
[image or embed]
— Rep. Mark Pocan (@pocan.house.gov) July 18, 2025 at 12:55 PM
"We are also alarmed by reports indicating that internal USAID memos requesting urgent approval to move the biscuits went unanswered for months," the lawmakers said. "If accurate, this speaks to a systemic breakdown in communication and leadership that has paralyzed America's food aid delivery systems."
"The United States has long led the world in humanitarian assistance, not only as a matter of compassion but also as a cornerstone of global stability and diplomacy," the letter concludes. "Destroying aid that could save lives undermines that legacy and damages our standing in the international community. We urge you to immediately prioritize the distribution of all remaining and viable food assistance stockpiles. American leadership demands nothing less."
Rubio's decision comes a month after the secretary of state ordered the abolition of all overseas USAID positions amid the Trump administration's downsizing and elimination of the agency, one of many targeted by the so-called Department of Government Efficiency, formerly led by multibillionaire Elon Musk.
As Common Dreams reported in May, 66,000 tons of food—including grains, high-energy biscuits, and vegetable oil—were already mouldering in USAID warehouses.
U.S. State Department spokesperson Tammy Bruce attempted to justify Rubio's decision during a Thursday press conference.
"If something is expired, we will destroy it. It's a matter of whether or not it's safe to distribute," she said, adding that 500 metric tons amounts to "less than 1%" of all annual U.S. food aid.
"We, as an example, distribute roughly 1 million metric tons of food aid every year, which is reflective of the American people's generosity," Bruce said.
While many observers expressed surprise over the impending destruction of so much food aid, some contended that it tracks with the Trump administration's wider attitudes toward poor people.
"Republicans don't care if American children starve," said podcast host Lana Quest, "so why would they care about famine in other countries?"Keep ReadingShow Less
Facing Growing Outrage and Legal Action, Trump Admin Frees Chunk of Withheld Education Funds
"He's still illegally withholding $5.5 billion more from schools," said Sen. Bernie Sanders. "Congress passed it. The president signed it. Trump must release it."
Jul 18, 2025
Following widespread backlash and threats of legal action, the administration of U.S. President Donald Trump announced Friday that it will free up part of the $6.8 billion worth of education funding the president has withheld from states.
Earlier this week, 24 states sued the administration after it announced it would refuse to send the money—which had already been appropriated by Congress—to states just weeks before the start of the school year, citing "ongoing programmatic review" to ensure that none of it is used to fund diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives.
According to The New York Times:
The withheld money includes about 14% of all federal funding for elementary and secondary education across the country. It helps pay for free or low-cost after-school programs that give students a place to go while their parents work. It also covers training to improve the effectiveness of teachers and help for children learning English.
These programs provide a critical source of childcare that allow low-income families to work. Without them, organizations like the YMCA and the Boys and Girls Club of America have said they'd need to scale back their offerings.
A report issued last week by New America noted the disproportionate impact the cuts would have on low-income students:
Students from low-income backgrounds are especially at risk of losing education resources. Districts serving high-poverty student populations (those where over 25% of children live in poverty) will lose over five times as much funding per pupil as low-poverty school districts (those where fewer than 10% of children live in poverty). The 100 school districts facing the biggest cuts on a per-pupil basis have an average child poverty rate of 24.4%, much higher than the national average of 15.3%.
The administration held up the funding for weeks, causing a building panic among educators and families. A group of 10 Republican senators even sent a letter on Wednesday urging a top Trump official to let the money flow to their states.
Then, on Friday, the administration announced that it would allow $1.4 billion worth of funding to be released to states beginning Monday, though they would still reserve the right to choke it off once again should any of it be used to violate the president's executive orders.
The administration said it will continue to withhold the remaining $5.5 billion and provided no timeline for when it might be released.
According to Education Week, schools around the country had been "banking" on that money for teacher training, English-learner services, migrant and adult education programs, and academic enrichment being delivered on its expected due date of July 1.
David Schuler, executive director of AASA, an association of school superintendents, said that while he was happy to see some of the money released, withholding the rest was still putting severe strain on schools.
"Districts should not be in this impossible position where the administration is denying funds that had already been appropriated to our public schools, by Congress," Schuler said in a statement. "The remaining funds must be released immediately—America's children are counting on it."
Senate Appropriations Committee Vice Chair Patty Murray (D-Wash.) announced Friday that she would block the fast-tracking of a Trump appointee for the Department of Education until Trump releases all the funds.
"Just weeks out from the new school year, families, teachers, and school districts are suffering the consequences of President Trump's needless and illegal blockade of this funding," Murray said. "This administration won't so much as explain why the money is held up or when we can expect it to go out."
Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), who joined Murray's efforts, welcomed the news that some of the funding had been unfrozen.
"Today we forced Trump to release $1.3 billion for more than 10,000 summer and after-school programs helping 1.4 million students," he said.
But, Sanders added, "it's not enough. He's still illegally withholding $5.5 billion more from schools. Congress passed it. The president signed it. Trump must release it."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Devastating' Trump Cuts to FDA, NIH Will Result in Fewer Medications, New Analysis Warns
"The United States' effort to bring cutting-edge treatments to patients," said a group of lawmakers, "will come to a grinding halt because of the Trump administration's devastating cuts to NIH and FDA funding."
Jul 18, 2025
One former federal health official said Friday that medications with the potential to "substantially change healthcare and improve the lives of patients" are likely to be among the dozens that won't be developed if Republicans pass a proposal by the Trump administration to slash crucial health research funding.
Jeremy Berg, a former director of the National Institute of General Medical Sciences at the National Institutes of Health, was referring to an analysis by the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) of President Donald Trump's proposal to cut funding to the NIH by 40%—budget cuts that experts have warned would kneecap the country's ability to research emerging health threats and treatments, while terminating the United States' position as a world leader in medical innovation.
"The lost drugs" resulting from the budget cuts, Berg told The New York Times, "are more likely to be the novel 'first in class' drugs."
The CBO found that even a 10% reduction in the NIH budget would stop an estimated 30 new medications from coming to market over the next three decades.
A reduction in the agency's external preclinical research "would ultimately decrease the number of new drugs coming to market by roughly 4.5%, or about two drugs per year," the CBO said, with the impact of the budget cuts growing over three decades.
The CBO also analyzed proposals that would affect the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), including one that would cut staff and result in increased review times for new medications by nine months. By the second decade of the policy being in effect, said the CBO, 10 fewer drugs would be approved each decade—a 2% reduction—with 23 new medications ultimately being prevented from coming to market.
Already, the FDA's workforce has been reduced by about 15%, with 3,500 people losing their jobs or resigning.
The Times reported that the FDA has approved 25 new drugs so far in 2025; it has authorized an average of 60 new medications per year in the past.
"This unprecedented assault on our healthcare institutions by the Trump administration will cut off access to medicines that patients are waiting for, cede our global leadership in medical innovation to China, and cause wide-ranging harms to our nation's economy."
A group of Democratic lawmakers who serve as ranking members of key committees emphasized that the CBO's analysis likely vastly underestimates the impact Trump's proposed cuts would have on the NIH, as it investigated the potential impact of just a 10% budget cut rather than the full 40% cut the president has proposed.
"The proposed cuts are so enormous that CBO's own model is unable to produce an estimate," said U.S. Reps. Brendan Boyle (D-Pa.), ranking member of the House Budget Committee, and Frank Pallone (D-N.J.), along with Sens. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.).
"The United States leads the world in medical innovation because of our continued investments in research and development at the NIH," said the lawmakers. "Every $1 invested in NIH research returns $2.50 to the U.S. economy. This unprecedented assault on our healthcare institutions by the Trump administration will cut off access to medicines that patients are waiting for, cede our global leadership in medical innovation to China, and cause wide-ranging harms to our nation's economy."
"The United States' effort to bring cutting-edge treatments to patients with cancers, rare diseases, cardiovascular diseases, and neurodegenerative diseases," they added, "will come to a grinding halt because of the Trump administration's devastating cuts to NIH and FDA funding."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular