A (Very Basic) Introduction to the Kansas City Plant Jay Coghlan, Executive Director, Nuclear Watch New Mexico October 2007

Mission Statement Provide timely and accurate information to the public on nuclear weapons issues. Empower effective citizen action. Promote greater safety and environmental protection. Promote federal policy changes that curb the proliferation of nuclear weapons. For much more information, including the Kansas City Plant, see

KCP and the Nuclear Weapons Complex

KCP’s Official “Vision” “To be the most admired team within the NNSA [National Nuclear Security Administration] for our relentless drive to convert ideas into the highest quality products and services for national security by applying the right technology, outstanding program management and the best commercial practices.”

Turning Science into Reality “As the most comprehensive manufacturing facility within the nuclear weapons complex, the KCP plays an important role by taking designs from the national labs and turning science into reality.” -Kansas City Plant website

Primary Manufacturer of Non-Nuclear Components From “official” KCP power point

KCP Capabilities From “official” KCP power point

Nuclear Weapons Spending and KCP More than 98% of the budget for the Kansas City Plant is nuclear weapons-related The yearly totals follow fluctuations in the overall NNSA budget (look closely to see non- weapons $$!). Sources: NNSA Congressional Budget requests. KCP officials state that the Plant receives another ~$130 million annually in “Work for Others”, but virtually all of that is for nuclear weapons as well.

The Monthly Workload KCP claims that it is the “NNSA’s highest rated production facility.” 5,000 nuclear weapons components packages are shipped monthly to other NNSA sites. In all, 104,000 components were shipped in 2006.

Pace Projected to Continue KCP is currently producing components for all of nuclear warhead types depicted above. KCP is currently having its heaviest workload in 20 years. This pace is projected to continue until 2015.

Relocating the Plant NNSA wants to build a new half billion dollar, 1.5 million square foot plant in the Kansas City area.

KCP Is Barred from the Ongoing Review of the Future Nuclear Weapons Complex “NNSA believes that it is appropriate to separate the analyses of the transformation of non-nuclear production from the [Transformation] Supplemental PEIS because decisions regarding non-nuclear activities would neither significantly affect nor be affected by decisions regarding the transformation of nuclear production activities.” - KCP Notice of Intent, May 1, 2007

Yet KCP Was in a 1996 Transformation Study “… two alternatives are being considered that would meet the needs of the Program : downsizing the facilities that presently perform this mission at KCP and 2) transferring the KCP nonnuclear fabrication mission to LANL [Los Alamos], LLNL [Lawrence Livermore] and SNL [Sandia]…” Decision: “The relocation of this mission to SNL, LANL or LLNL would entail environmental impacts associated with the construction and operation of new facilities… DOE’s decision is to downsize the existing facilities at the KCP.” But now NNSA wants to move the Plant anyway, yet excludes it from the growing national debate.

KCP Is Central to New Nuclear Weapons NNSA proposes to design and build future “Reliable Replacement Warheads” (RRW) to transform and revitalize its nuclear weapons complex, which would directly affect KCP. “The KCP is continuing on the path to work with the NNSA to transition from ‘protecting the capabilities of the past’ to ‘creating the responsive infrastructure [RI] of the future…’ ” “As the Reliable Replacement Warhead requirements emerge, strategic investments [by KCP] will be identified…” “As a minimum the plan will address the following interim RI [responsive infrastructure] goals for 2012:.. Adapt weapons for new capabilities – 24 months [and] Warhead design, development, and initial production - 48 months. - From KCP 2006 & 2007 Ten-Year Site Plans

Third Party Construction Funding NNSA decides it wants a new Kansas City Plant and asks its current landlord, the General Services Administration (GSA), for help. GSA bids out construction in a build-to-suit leasing arrangement. The winning developer raises private financing for construction. The private developers lease the new plant back to GSA, and NNSA subleases it from GSA. While the future nuclear weapons complex is being hotly debated, can it be possible that a new half billion dollar Kansas City Plant will be built not subject to overview by Congress and the power of its purse? (as far as we can figure out)

Where’s the Money for Cleanup? Internal KCP strategic plans state that $20 million dollars in funding was needed for cleanup in FYs 2007 & Despite that, and the known presence of VOCs & PCBs in soil and groundwater, NNSA asked Congress for just $3.7 million in FYs 2007 and Should the new plant be built, what federal agency will be responsible for final cleanup of the old plant? Map of contamination plumes in groundwater at KCP - medy/Kansas/ksplnt02.html

There’s a pattern here…… The Kansas City Plant is excluded from national review of transforming the nuclear weapons complex. The new KCP is given a lesser “environmental assessment” rather than a more comprehensive “environmental impact statement.” Private financing will likely avoid congressional review. Current cleanup is underfunded. Long-term cleanup is in doubt. GSA/NNSA plans to silence the public by not holding a hearing for the draft assessment expected this November. Get active and stop the pattern! Clean up, don’t build up the nuclear weapons complex!