The Department of Energy's June 5th Uranium Enrichment Decision: Hearing Before the Subcommittee on Energy Research and Production of the Committee on Science and Technology, House of Representatives, Ninety-ninth Congress, First Session, June 19, 1985

Front Cover
 

What people are saying - Write a review

We haven't found any reviews in the usual places.

Other editions - View all

Common terms and phrases

Popular passages

Page 90 - ... pm, the subcommittee recessed, to reconvene at 1 pm, the same day.] AFTERNOON SESSION Mr.
Page 234 - BEFORE THE HOUSE COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY SUBCOMMITTEE ON ENERGY RESEARCH AND PRODUCTION WITNESS: JOHN R.
Page 346 - If we con ba of any service to you In the future, please let us know. Very truly yours. Lyhle E. Glllenwater LEG:lh Asst.
Page 99 - ... even increased, depending upon the reaction of the European suppliers. But prices at the upper end of the range would surely have the opposite effect. Option I: Current Pricing Policy The current US price structure is based on long-run average cost. This is calculated each year by summing estimates of the next ten years' operating costs, depreciation charges, and interest charges on unrecovered government investment. This sum is then divided by the amount of SWUs to be sold over that period....
Page 7 - ... machinery and other necessities of the agricultural industry are purchased from industries operating on a fixed-price basis, a price which assures them profit in every transaction. But when the farmer places his products on the market, he receives what is offered, not what he asks or what he deserves. If you will bear with me I would like to read a letter from George M. Parker, of Wilsall, Mont., a long-time farmer in Montana, who explains the farm situation in my home State, as follows | reading^...
Page 34 - I am Joe La Grone, Manager of the Oak Ridge Operations Office (ORO) of the US Department of Energy (DOE).
Page 25 - ... favored the selection of AVLIS over the Advanced Gas Centrifuge for further development clearly showed its greater potential for low cost and reliable production for the future. The AVLIS technology is less capital intensive, requires significantly less investment prior to a decision to deploy, has a lower estimated SWU cost, has greater potential for cost reductions through technology improvements, and is more adaptable to deployment in increments that can match the evolving needs of the enrichment...
Page 92 - ... suppliers.1 Option II: Marginal Cost Pricing Alternatively, pricing policy could be based on marginal cost, resting on the concept that costs previously incurred ought not to influence decisions about the future use of resources.2 A price based on marginal cost would not collect the roughly $4.5 billion is undepreciated investment for gaseous diffusion and centrifuge technology. This action would require amending the current pricing statute that calls for full cost recovery. It could, however,...
Page 25 - ... countries decide to deploy AVLIS, the US will have a more advanced, lower cost process on line. The figures of merit that favored the selection of AVLIS over the Advanced Gas Centrifuge for further development clearly showed Its greater potential for low cost and reliable production for the future. The AVLIS technology is less capital intensive, requires significantly less investment prior to a decision to deploy, has a lower estimated SWU cost, has greater potential for cost reductions through...
Page 102 - ... consumers are willing to pay more for an additional unit of service than the value of the resources committed to producing it. When price is below marginal cost, consumers demand additional units of service but would not value these units enough to pay for the resources consumed in providing them. This suggests that the prices set for government enterprises should be based on marginal cost to the extent that efficiency considerations apply. of eventual repayment — perhaps beyond the year 2000,...

Bibliographic information