|
|
 |
||||||
 |
Pantex DOE shrinks its bombplex By Greg Rohloff Pantex, like other operations in the Department of Energy's nuclear weapons complex, would become a smaller facility with missions for assembly and disassembly of weapons and storage of plutonium pits as part of its functions. That was the message from DOE officials in Amarillo last week for a hearing on the agency's revised Complex Transformation program, a successor to the Complex 2030 proposal that sought to consolidate nuclear bomb facilities into one large plant. When Congress last year nixed funds for the so-called reliable replacement warhead, the DOE switched its focus on consolidation into making existing facilities more efficient. Still, at the Feb. 28 hearing, local comments followed a predictable pattern, with Amarillo Economic Development Corp. Vice President Steve Pritchett and City Commissioner Jim Simms both reiterating that Amarillo and Pantex were a good fit because of Amarilloans' support for the nuclear weapons program and the strong local work ethic, while detractors again called for a focus on disarmament. "Put aside the sword," Tom Egan, of Austin, said. "Enough with the swords." Egan and his wife, Jean, a social worker, resettled in Austin after losing everything in Hurricane Katrina and are part of the Catholic peace movement Pax Christi. They argued that the proposal from DOE amounts to new weapons being made as part of the proposal to locate a new plutonium pit center at Los Alamos National Laboratory, which would make 80 new plutonium pits a year. "I believe we need a transformation," Egan said, latching onto the DOE's theme. "Not of our weapons but of ourselves." Their arguments were joined locally. Pam Allison of Canyon questioned the DOE's intent to clean up the perched aquifer that she said threatens the Ogallala Aquifer, the main source of water in the Panhandle. The smaller aquifer, essentially isolated from the Ogallala, was poisoned when the plant was a munitions factory during World War II. She also questioned the continued reliance on nuclear weapons as a deterrent to attacks on the United States. "It makes no sense to build a weapon so destructive it can't be used," she said. Doris Smith, a neighbor of Pantex in rural Carson County, said the United States should pursue disarmament and disassemble all nuclear weapons to comply with the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty that entered into force 38 years ago and was renewed in 1995. Then, the DOE could concentrate on cleaning up environmental damage and resultant health issues and protecting the groundwater. Jerry Stein of Amarillo read a statement from retired Amarillo Roman Catholic Bishop Leroy Matthiesen, who expressed a fear that a new plutonium pit center could spark a new nuclear arms race worldwide. Ted Wyka, the DOE hearing officer and National Nuclear Security Administration document manager, welcomed such comments as important to the process. And while critics railed against a $150 billion cost figure as wasteful, Wyka explained that the figure was drawn from a Government Accountability Office estimate of spending over several years if the preferred option were adopted by Congress. The proposal could see a decrease in spending for the program, he said, once initial construction of new facilities was completed and those new facilities operated more cheaply than existing plants. Wyka also noted that these plans could be simply an academic exercise. Next year, after the arrival of a new presidential administration, a new assessment of nuclear weapons needs will be drawn. E-mail
comments about this story Posted: March 6, 2008
|
|
