WASHINGTON -- Chemical weapons disposal
sites in Kentucky and Colorado are hamstrung by outdated cost ceilings that
should be removed, senators from the two states told a Defense Department
official in a letter sent Friday.
The path forward in execution of safe and
expeditious disposal of the stockpiles at these two locations is in jeopardy
due to this fundamental flaw in the process," the senators wrote.
In 2003, the Pentagon offered certified
figures, saying disposal of the stockpiled weapons would cost $2 billion
at the Blue Grass Army Depot in Richmond, Ky., and $1.5 billion at the Pueblo
Chemical Depot in Pueblo, Colo.
As the projected costs of the programs
crept over those totals, the Pentagon started asking site managers for redesigns
and other cost-cutting measures to meet the caps.
But Sen. Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., in an
April letter to Krieg's predecessor, said defense officials were never required
to list a specific cost, and locking in an estimate before the design work
started "seems ... misguided at best."
McConnell was joined on Friday's letter
by Sen. Jim Bunning, R-Ky., and Colorado Sens. Wayne Allard, a Republican,
and Ken Salazar, a Democrat.
Under an international treaty, ratified
by the Senate in 1997, the weapons stockpiled at eight sites across the
country must be destroyed by 2012.
The Blue Grass and Pueblo depots are the
only sites where disposal facilities have not already been constructed.
Craig Williams, executive director of
the Chemical Weapons Working Group, a watchdog organization in Berea, Ky.,
said the 2003 estimates are unrealistic and could lead site managers to
avoid new technologies that could make the sites safer.
"The way the situation is right now, cost
is driving the design, which can lead to safety taking a back seat to corner-cutting,"
he said.
Williams said defense officials could lift
the price caps by telling site managers the estimates are no longer accurate,
or by asking Congress to accept an amended version of the certified figures.
___
On the Net:Chemical Weapons
Working Group: http://www.cwwg.org