Pentagon may delay disposal of Pueblo chemical
weapons
The Pueblo Chemical Depot stores 2,600 tons of mustard
agent. The
weapons and metal casings are deteriorating while being stored in
igloo-shaped structures. (THE GAZETTE FILE)
By PAM ZUBECK
THE GAZETTE
The Pentagon wants to take eight years longer to destroy hazardous
mustard agent at the Pueblo Chemical Depot than previously planned.
The new plan would drive the cost up by $600 million and violate a
deadline imposed by an international treaty.
In addition, the Defense Department may propose shipping the
partially treated chemicals out of state for final processing to save
$150 million, a plan likely to require congressional review.
A clearer picture of where the 60-year-old mustard agent
would be shipped may be stated in documents state officials expect to
be filed later this month or in early December.
The chemicals, which would be treated with a neutralization and
biodegradation process, would be transported by truck or rail. A
treatment facility in New Jersey handled a similar task in the past,
but an attempt to ship chemicals out of Indiana ran aground after
people in Ohio objected.
The Pueblo depot stores 2,600 tons of deadly World War
II-era mustard agents. The weapons and their metal casings are
deteriorating while being stored in iglooshaped structures east of the
city.
State health officials have expressed concern about leaks,
including one a year ago, although none has posed a threat so far.
The project has been planned for years and stalled 18 months
ago when defense officials said they wanted to move the chemicals to
Utah for destruction, a plan later junked.
Last spring, the Army planned to complete the project by 2014.
But last month, defense officials told the Colorado Chemical
Demilitarization Citizens Advisory Commission in Pueblo a new schedule
calls for destruction to extend to 2020, with final shutdown several
years later.
Under provisions of the 1997 Chemical Weapons Convention, a
signatory must notify the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical
Weapons of its inability to comply with a 2007 treaty deadline one year
in advance.
An advisory sent to Congress last spring said the project
wouldn't comply with either that date or a five-year extension allowed
under the treaty.
Defense officials also told the advisory commission last month the
price would rise to $3.2 billion from $2.6 billion.
State health officials seem mystified.
"That's definitely the information we're trying to wrap our
arms around," said Doug Knappe, the Colorado Department of Public
Health and Environment's unit leader for the Pueblo Chemical
demilitarization project, referring to the schedule and price. "It's a
little irrational. It doesn't make sense to spend more to take longer
to destroy it."
Sen. Wayne Allard, R-Colo., blamed the slowdown on "the DOD's
mismanagement of the chemical weapons destruction program."
Mismanagement also is reflected in the recent announcement of
escalating costs, he said.
Allard noted he included contract-incentive provisions in the 2007
Defense Authorization Bill designed to speed the project.
Allard declined to comment on the plan to ship the chemicals
elsewhere for final treatment until he learns more details about
government requirements for destruction of such waste.
John Klomp, chairman of the Citizens Advisory Commission and
a former Pueblo County commissioner, said the biggest issue among
Pueblo residents is shipping the waste outside the state.
Not only would it remove one process, and the payroll that
accompanies it, from Pueblo, but it also likely would suspend the
program, perhaps indefinitely, as environmental advocates fight the
government over moving the weapons across the country.
"First, you're shipping what still is a toxic waste over the
road," Klomp said. "Second, there are political boundaries that may not
allow you to ship through their area, and third, and most importantly,
there could be litigation which could hold up the project for a long
period of time. We don't want this project to go back on hold."
The Pentagon contends the product, equivalent to a
commercial compound used in the paint and ink industry, isn't
considered hazardous by the Department of Transportation; nor is it
toxic to humans. Shipping by truck would mean two 6,000-gallon
truckloads a day for 24 months. By rail, it would take three
30,000-gallon tank cars per week for two years, the Pentagon said.
Although the Army claims shipping would save $150 million,
Klomp was skeptical, saying that figure doesn't account for shipping or
litigation costs.
Phase one -- roads, a security gate and fencing, is done,
Klomp said. Phase two is under way and consists of erecting warehouses
and other support buildings. Construction of the plant to treat the
weapons is years away.
The Citizens Advisory Commission will meet Dec. 6 to hear
more details as Pentagon officials update timelines, cost figures and
other plans, Klomp said.
CONTACT THE WRITER: 636-0238 or
pam.zubeck@gazette.com
