Author Archives: kcnukeswatch

PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REPORT REVEALS HONEYWELL PUSH TO AVOID SUPERFUND STATUS AT KC PLANT

KC Peace Planters,

4509 Walnut St.,

Kansas City, MO 64111

816-561-1181

Contact: Ann Suellentrop M.S.R.N. 913-271-7925

PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REPORT REVEALS HONEYWELL PUSH TO AVOID SUPERFUND STATUS AT KC PLANT

KC PEACE PLANTERS ASKS: WHY AVOID SUPERFUND CLEANUP?

 
The 2011 Performance Evaluation Report (PER) for Honeywell Federal Manufacturing & Technologies (FM&T) demonstrates that it played a key role in preventing the Kansas City Plant (KCP) for nuclear weapons components production from being listed as a Superfund site. These reports, which are the government’s scorecard for awarding tens of millions of dollars to nuclear weapons contractors, were released Tuesday by the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) in response to a March 28 lawsuit by Nuclear Watch New Mexico. While Honeywell’s evaluation provides only a cursory look at operations for fiscal year 2011, and is necessarily biased by the simple fact that largely the contractor is reviewing its own operation, it does indicate areas of concern.

While preparing to move to a new production plant subsidized by the city’s industrial development corporation, the contractor Honeywell “develop[ed] an alternate strategy to avoid listing on EPA’s National Priorities (Superfund) List…[that] could have impacted the ability to dispose of the [old] KCP once the facility is vacated at the end of FY14″. Specifically, in order to avoid Superfund listing, Honeywell asked the Missouri Department of Natural Resources (DNR) for a modification to the Plant’s waste and cleanup permit. Groundwater at the old plant is contaminated and there are growing controversial worker health concerns.

Contrary to the common perception that the nuclear weapons business is winding down, the Report also documents that the KC Plant delivered over 121,000 weapon-related components. These include new fuzes for the sub-launched W76 warhead, which some experts believe endows that nuclear weapon with more precise heights-of-burst, which in combination with increased accuracy give it new military capabilities.

“Life Extension Programs are the bread and butter of the KC Plant. We’re told we need to ‘modernize’ nuclear weapons for our security, but more and more people are waking up to the reality that they are a suicidal threat to all we hold dear,” said Ann Suellentrop, of KC Physicians for Social Responsibility.

“And why is the government rushing to sell the old plant when it is morally obliged to fully clean it up, not build up, the mess that the nuclear weapons industry has created. While we don’t yet know if Honeywell’s permit modification request has been granted, Missourians need to hold our Department of Natural Resources’ feet to the fire to protect the well being of citizens and not the self-interests of the nuclear weaponeers.”

“It appears that the NNSA with EPA’s help was willing to roll back the odometer to dump a lemon on an unsuspecting buyer,” said Scott Dye, national program director of the Sierra Club Water Sentinels, based in Columbia Missouri.

“Changing the rules of the process for the Superfund’s National Priorities List does not change the widespread contamination at the complex that will clearly not be adequately addressed.”

Dr. Catherine Thomasson, Executive Director of the national office of Physicians for Social Responsibility, stated,

“We question the need for a new nuclear weapons parts plant at all, since we have thousands of weapons being dismantled. Serious health outcomes due to exposure to beryllium, benzene and other toxins were not dealt with adequately at the old factory and are still not addressed fully.”

“Why is Honeywell getting an award for managing the Kansas City Plant? The feds say it’s outmoded and has to be replaced—that’s their justification for building the new plant on Missouri Highway 150, near Grandview,” said Henry Stoever, Board chair of PeaceWorks-KC.

“In reality, the KC Plant at Bannister Federal Complex is a cesspool of contamination, with wells monitoring the toxins there into perpetuity. Honeywell and the NNSA have bureaucratically broken up the individual contamination sites so the KC Plant as a whole is not on the Superfund list, meaning that the KC Plant won’t get more adverse publicity. However, that also means the site doesn’t get as much federal money for cleanup and lacks the supervision Congress might give a superfund site. The award for Honeywell is bizarre. Honeywell and the NNSA are not being transparent about the great problems there, including the many people who have died or suffered illnesses from exposure to contaminants at Bannister Federal Complex.”

“On March 22, the City Council unanimously passed the KC Peace Planters* petition to plan for alternative jobs for the KC Plant’s workers,” said Dr. Rachel MacNair, coordinator of the ballot initiatives. “On April 5, the City Council will consider our second petition to withdraw the city from all financial involvement in current and future contracts concerning the manufacture of nuclear weapons. The citizens of Kansas City have to right to know about and vote on what their city is involved in”.
“We are grateful to our colleagues at Nuclear Watch New Mexico,” said Suellentrop, “for their persistence in getting the release of this information. Now that we see what it is in it, we wonder why, in this age of transparency, NNSA withheld the information and forced the public to go to court to get it. They have a duty to provide information to the public, and NNSA seems to have abandoned that mission altogether.”

The contract between NNSA and Honeywell FM&T states that the term KCP covers operations at all FM&T locations: Kansas City, Missouri; Albuquerque, New Mexico, Los Alamos, New Mexico; and Fort Chaffee, Arkansas. Copies of the Performance Evaluation Reports for the eight sites in the NNSA’s nuclear weapons complex are available at: http://www.nukewatch.org

*KC Peace Planters is a coalition of 12 local civic, environmental and peace groups. see http://www.foolish-investment.com


Expert Witnesses to Testify at February 22nd Hearing on Ballot Initiatives

Kansas City Peace Planters

February 20, 2012

Contact:

Rachel M. MacNair, Ph.D., Petition Coordinator, (816)753-2057

Ann Suellentrop, (913)271-7925

Hearing: Wednesday, February 22, 2012, 1:30 PM

Planning, Zoning & Economic Development Committee, City Council Chamber, 26th Floor, City Hall.

City councilmember Ed Ford has introduced two ordinances ORDINANCE NO. 120146, and ORDINANCE NO. 120147 ,  to place each of our two initiatives on the ballot. One measure proposes to safeguard jobs with contingency conversion plans, and the other proposes to remove the city’s financial involvement with the plant. In support of these initiatives, and to challenge policies promoted by councilmembers we will offering testimonies from two expert witnesses:

Steven Starr, MT (ASCP) is Director of the Clinical Laboratory Science Program at the University of Missouri and Senior Scientist with Physicians for Social Responsibility. He will present research on the impact of nuclear war on climate change, agriculture and public health. Starr’s studies, which have been published in the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists, demonstrate global and sustaining consequences even for nuclear war between states with smaller arsenals such as India and Pakistan.

Dr. Marcus Iszard is Director of Assessment and Associate Professor of Pharmacology/Toxicology at the University of Missouri at Kansas City.             He will discuss the environmental and health impacts of nuclear weapons production, including issues of employee health and safety at the Bannister Federal Complex and the new campus for the Kansas City Plant.

(The ordinances call for the initiatives to be placed on the ballot June 5 with the understanding this would be the next available election date. Let it be understood there is no intention to request the City spend its resources to hold an election on our initiatives alone. If there are no other measures on the June 5th ballot, our measures would be postponed for a later election, likely August 7th.)


Obama Administration’s Austerity Plan for the Nuclear Weapons Complex: Boost Funding for Stockpile Modernization

For Immediate Release: February 15, 2012

Contact: Ann Suellentrop, 913.271.7925, annsuellen@gmail.com

 Obama Administration’s Austerity Plan for the Nuclear Weapons Complex: Boost Funding for Stockpile Modernization

The Obama Administration, in its Fiscal Year 2013 Budget Request for the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) exhibited the failure for practice to reflect policy. PSR Representative Ann Suellentrop, remarking on the $7.5 billion called for Weapons Activities in the request, “We need a national debate on the budget for our nuclear weapons stockpile, funding for stockpile modernization needs to be discussed.” Stockpile modernization refers to Life Extension Programs (LEP), the objective of LEPs is to upgrade the capabilities of warheads.

Amongst the $543 million request for LEPs include the modernization of the B61, under scrutiny from the Hill and abroad. Last September Senate appropriators reduced funding for the B61 LEP, concerned the program was compromising the reliability of the warhead by introducing new safety and surety features. In addition to challenges from appropriators, deployment of the B61 warhead in NATO countries is hotly disputed. The overseas mission of the B61 will likely be extinct before modernization of the warhead is completed in the early 2020s.

Boosting modernization for warheads typically means sacrificing funding for dismantlement operations. The bays at the Pantex Plant carry out dismantlement and LEP work; it is no surprise which program takes precedence. The Fiscal Year 2013 request for dismantlement and disposition, $51 million, is a 10% decrease from funding for Fiscal Year 2012.

PSR representative Alicia Dressman takes issue with budget priorities for the Kansas City Plant, “The KCP requests $234 million for Directed Stockpile Work, focusing on coordination with Pantex to procure and supply non-nuclear components for the B61 LEP. We would like to see cooperation between the KCP and Pantex on dismantlement of our nation’s stockpile, not modernization.”

“There is hope for the Obama Administration yet, plans for the Chemistry and Metallurgy Research Replacement (CMRR) facility in Los Alamos, NM, which would produce plutonium pits for modernized warheads, are indefinitely postponed. PSR Kansas City wishes the administration and Congress will adhere to a budget that is worthy of a policy seeking a “nuclear weapons free world.”

PHYSICIANS FOR SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY®

Greater Kansas City Chapter


KC Peace Planters Reach Goal on Petition Drive: Over 5,000 Signatures Delivered to City Hall

Press Release

Kansas City Peace Planters

Contact:

Rachel M. MacNair, Ph.D., Petition Coordinator, (816)753-2057

Ann Suellentrop, (913)271-7925

.

Having once again collected in the range of 5,000 signatures from Kansas City Missouri residents, this time on two separate initiative petitions, KC Peace Planters turn in both sets of petitions to the City Clerk at 10 am on Monday, November 14, 2011.

.

Below is a short summary of each initiative, and below that is the precise legal language. We listened carefully to objections raised by councilmembers in our previous effort, and we believe these are strengthened and will more clearly stand up in litigation if necessary.

.

Summary, Petition 1: Removal of City financial involvement in production of nuclear weapons components

1. Kansas City won’t make any more contracts for parts for nuclear weapons or finance their production in the future.

2. Kansas City will divest itself of the municipal bonds for nuclear weapons parts, to the extent allowed by law.

3. No local agency will own the plant.

4. If the court knocks down any provision, that provision can be cut off and the rest remain.

.

Summary, Petition 2: Safeguarding jobs with contingency plans for nuclear weapons facilities

1. The City will make detailed contingency plans for converting nuclear weapons plants in case they’re no longer utilized for that purpose.

2. Renewable energy production is an option to be considered.

3. The plans will be updated annually.

4. The plans will be available for public comment.

.

Legal Wording, Petition 1:

Removal of City financial involvement in production of nuclear weapons components

.

1) The City of Kansas City, Missouri (“the City”) shall not enter into any future contracts whereby it will be directly financially involved in any facilities that produce or procure components for, assemble, or refurbish nuclear weapons except for outside infrastructure improvements customarily provided by cities. The City is also barred from funding or subsidizing such a facility through taxes, bonds, loans, tax credits, credit, or any other financial scheme or mechanism.

.

2) The City shall use all means consistent with law and existing contractual obligations to divest itself as soon as reasonably feasible of current municipal bonds which finance or subsidize any facility which produces or procures any parts for, assembles, or refurbishes nuclear weapons.

.

3) From the effective date of this ordinance, no municipal agency, nor any body or entity controlled or appointed by the City, is authorized to own or lease any facilities involved in nuclear weapons production or procurement, assembly, or refurbishing.

.

4) The provisions of this Ordinance are severable. If any court of competent jurisdiction decides that any section, clause, sentence, part, or provision of this Ordinance is illegal, invalid, or unconstitutional, such decision shall not affect, impair, or invalidate any of the remaining sections, clauses, sentences, parts, or provisions of the Ordinance.

Safeguarding jobs with contingency plans for nuclear weapons facilities

.

1) The City of Kansas City, Missouri (“the City”) shall provide for the professional preparation of at least one economic conversion plan at any nuclear-weapons components production and procurement facilities within its boundaries, whether well-established or being built for the purpose, for the contingency that the federal government exercises its established contractual option of vacating the premises, or fails to make appropriations for the continued use of the facility, or that such facilities become abandoned or under-utilized. Such plans will include technical specifications, financial calculations, and provisions for any necessary program for retraining workers to the skills required at the converted facility, so that potential developers can be contacted quickly and will have adequate information to find the proposal attractive to their interests.

.

2) Production of new environmentally sound energy or other environmental technologies which will benefit the residents of the municipality and surrounding areas should be considered as an option for these facilities.

.

3) The plan or plans are to be reviewed and updated annually until such time as the facility has been successfully converted to other uses or appropriate contracts are in place to do so.

.

4) The plan or plans are to be made available for public inspection, allowing for public comment for improvement.


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.