A coalition of activist groups on Wednesday filed a lawsuit in hopes of preventing the U.S. government from building a $500 million nuclear-weapon component manufacturing facility that would replace an older site in Kansas City, Mo., the Natural Resources Defense Council announced (see GSN, May 6).
The plant at the Bannister Federal Complex has produced and acquired nonradioactive nuclear bomb parts for more than 50 years, work the plaintiffs said has left large quantities of waste that must be treated to prevent damage to the surrounding environment.
The suit contests a financing plan by the General Services Administration and National Nuclear Security Administration that would eventually give a developer ownership over the new, federally funded plant. The plaintiffs contended that the 20-year “build-to-suit” lease would violate the National Environmental Policy Act, the Public Buildings Act and the Anti-Deficiency Act.
“Both GSA and NNSA are seeking to abandon the Bannister Complex without considering the comprehensive site cleanup, costing hundreds of millions of dollars, which everyone recognizes will be necessary to allow economic redevelopment of the site,” Ann Suellentrop, a spokeswoman for the group Physicians for Social Responsibility and a plaintiff in the case, said in a statement.
“At a time when Congress is trying to reduce the costs and environmental footprint of the nuclear weapons complex, a cabal of regional federal agency officials and private developers is trying to hoodwink both federal and local taxpayers into footing the bill for a huge new plant for nuclear weapons production on what is now 185 acres of vacant agricultural land at the southwestern edge of Kansas City,” Christopher Paine, nuclear program head for lead plaintiff the Natural Resources Defense Council, said in the release (see related GSN story, today).
The organizations are seeking to have a federal court in Washington, D.C. block development of the new plant and order an environmental analysis for cleanup of the existing site, along with other relocation options (Natural Resources Defense Council release, Oct. 9).