About Social Media Today
Life goes on for the Department of Energy
The Department of Energy woke up after a three-day slumber through the Columbus Day holiday and said it would try to bring Constellation back to the negotiating table for a loan guarantee for the $7.7 billion Calvert Cliffs III nuclear reactor.
The Office of Management and Budget (OMB), which got the lion’s share of the blow of the negative publicity over Friday’s press barrage, told Platts Tuesday Oct 11 it has “a whole new set of modified terms” to present to the utility.
Previously, the government had told Constellation it wanted a reported 11.6% “risk premium" for the project which would require nearly $900 million. Constellation told the government to take a walk, but instead the feds just sat on their hands despite protests from Maryland’s democratic governor Martin O’Malley and Rep. Steny Hoyer, (D-Md), a senior party leader.
According to Platts, DOE and OMB are now mulling over whether to change the methodology for calculating the risk premium. That issue is at the heart of Constellation’s complaint. Constellation said in a letter to DOE Undersecretary Dan Poneman that OMB stonewalled the utility when it tried to discuss the issue.
EDF and Constellation still have to make up their minds whether and how they can continue to do business together. EDF is pretty hot under the collar, at least in public, about Constellation’s midnight press release last Friday. If there’s enough money on the table, and sufficient fear of failure, they’ll find a way to get back together.
Nuclear Energy Office asks for help
While the DOE office in charge of loan guarantees was huddling with OMB, the office that actually does something about nuclear energy was updating the trade press on $30 million in technical assistance contracts to six engineering firms. The award was made last June, but Shaw Group gained some ink with Engineering News Record about it Oct 6.
The companies will help the Nuclear Energy Office come up with new techniques for design and construction of nuclear plants and provide “analytical assessments” on conceptual designs. Also, the firm will provide advice on R&D requirements.
A DOE spokesperson told this blog Oct 12 the firms include:
- The Shaw Group working with Westinghouse, Exelon, and Longenecker Associates
- AREVA, with Battelle, B&W, JNFL, URS and Duke Energy;
- CH2M Hill, with BCP Engineers;
- Enercon, with Entergy, S.M. Stoller and Anatech;
- EnergySolutions, with AECL, Booz Allen Hamilton, UK National Nuclear Laboratory, Exelon, International Nuclear Services, Sargent and Lundy, Talisman International, Teledyne Brown, Columbia Basin Consulting Group, Northwind and Terranear PMC LLC;
- GE Hitachi, with Ernst and Young, Fluor, Lockheed Martin and Dupont;
My question is why isn’t some of this money going to the NRC to help the agency get smart on small modular reactors? That would make a lot more sense right now.
Also, none of this work covers the Next Generation Nuclear Plant (NGNP). A planned $40 million contract to two consortiums was cut back to one last May. General Atomics completed its $22.6 million work scope, but Westinghouse did not come to terms with the government for its piece.
Note to Engineering News Record – there are not six $30 million contracts, just one.
Nuclear Energy roadmap
The government is very big on roadmaps. The Nuclear Energy Office published last April a roadmap for its work on the nation’s nuclear energy future.
Assuming we still have a nuclear future, given the way the Obama administration is handling loan guarantees, the roadmap lays out objectives in important areas. They include reactor life extension, the nuclear fuel cycle, reactor economics, and protecting reactors from terrorists.
These are all important mission objectives. I wonder how much funding any of them will get as the deficit spooked Congress returns in February 2011 to develop the next round of appropriations bills?
For that matter, any discretionary funding is going to be under tight scrutiny no matter who wins the elections. The next two years will be tough for federal budget writers.
That’s all folks.
# # #
