Defense Environment Alert
an exclusive biweekly report on defense policies for cleanup, compliance and pollution prevention


Vol. 13, No. 1--January 11, 2005

NEW DOD POLICY ENDORSES LOWER FUNDING PRIORITY FOR ACWA

A new Defense Department policy appears to place a lower funding priority on the facilities that are under development to destroy assembled chemical weapons through neutralization methods as compared to chemical weapons demilitarization facilities that generally rely on incineration. The policy comes as a national citizen's coalition is planning Jan. 12 to release documents it says show DOD will severely cut funding for the assembled weapons neutralization program.

And despite a 2012 treaty deadline for destroying chemical weapons, DOD in the policy also suggests delaying the assembled weapons neutralization program in order to make design changes to the methods.

The policy was not surprising as it follows assertions made last year by another high-level DOD official that the Pentagon would issue new policy requiring the program manager for the Pueblo, CO, destruction plant - one of the neutralization facilities - to scale back budget plans and keep costs within the project's original $1.5 billion pricetag (Defense Environment Alert, Nov. 30, 2004, p3).

The Dec. 21, 2004, document obtained by Defense Environment Alert, also triggers changes that will make it more difficult for chemical demilitarization program managers to redistribute funds among the various chemical demilitarization programs depending on circumstances and need, according to a spokesman for the Chemical Weapons Working Group (CWWG), a national citizen's coalition.

The Acquisition Decision Memorandum (ADM) signed by DOD Acting Acquisition, Technology & Logistics Under Secretary Michael Wynne calls for prioritizing funding "[t]o ensure the continued and future success of our operational and constructed sites," which would exclude the two neutralization projects - in Pueblo, CO, and Blue Grass, KY. These are part of DOD's Assembled Chemical Weapons Alternatives (ACWA) program. Neither destruction facility has yet been constructed. In contrast, several other chemical demilitarization projects are either operational or constructed. Relevant documents are available on InsideEPA.com. See page 2 for details.

Colorado and Kentucky senators and environmentalists last year opposed the department's initial move to try to strip funding for the Colorado site in order to pay for other demilitarization sites, and feared the department would also move to cut funding for the Kentucky site. At press time, specific budget figures being developed by DOD for the chemical weapons destruction program were not yet available. A source with the ACWA program says without the fiscal year 2006 budget figures, it is not yet clear what the funding structure will look like under the new ADM.

The reprioritizing comes as the United States is facing an extended 2007 deadline to destroy 45 percent of its chemical weapons stockpile. The Government Accountability Office (GAO) last April questioned whether the U.S. government would meet that deadline - established under the international Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC) - unless the chemical demilitarization program resolved various problems related to schedule delays. Further, GAO projected the United States could miss a 2012 deadline to eliminate all of its stockpiled chemical weapons (Defense Environment Alert, April 6, 2004, p26).

In the new ADM, Wynne suggests delaying the ACWA program if necessary, which implies the neutralization process is still uncertain - an assertion the CWWG spokesman says flies in the face of Army-sanctioned approvals of the technologies. At the same time, the memo does not rescind a directive established in a 2002 ADM calling for acceleration of weapons destruction at the Colorado site.

"Under the new funding profile, the [program manager for] ACWA and the Army shall develop alternatives to achieve the 2012 CWC deadline, or, as necessary, to delay the ACWA program to allow for design changes while the operational viability and stability of the neutralization process is ascertained," Wynne says.

This language seems to reflect a lower priority for the ACWA program, the CWWG spokesman says. And this source says Wynne's questioning of the "viability and stability" of the neutralization technology contradicts findings from the National Research Council and the Army's own records of decision (RODS) for the Colorado and Kentucky facilities. The technology has already been demonstrated, proven, accepted by scientists, endorsed by the Army and certified to Congress, the source says, alleging the statement seems to provide political cover for a budgetary decision on the ACWA sites.

Wynne's directive also divides the chemical demilitarization program into three so-called major defense acquisition programs in order to "provide greater visibility into the execution" of the program and to "comply with Congressional intent to maintain an autonomous ACWA program." The new program elements are: "Chem Demil - CMA" program, "Chem Demil - CMA Newport" program and "Chem Demil - ACWA" program. CMA refers to the Chemical Materials Agency, the Army program that oversees chemical demilitarization.

The "Chem Demil - CMA" program's mission is to destroy the chemical munitions stored at sites in Alabama, Arkansas, Utah, Oregon and Maryland, and to oversee the non-stockpile chemical weapons destruction program and stockpile emergency preparedness program, the memo says. The Army-managed "Chem Demil - CMA Newport" program will oversee destruction of chemical agent stored at Newport, IN, which houses bulk agent rather than configured weapons. And the DOD-run ACWA program will manage the "Chem Demil - ACWA" program, whose mission will be to destroy the weapons at the Colorado and Kentucky sites using an "alternative" technology to incineration, according to the memo.

The new divisions will restrict program managers' flexibility to move funds among different sites within the three traditional budget lines of research and development, operation and maintenance, and procurement, the CWWG spokesman says. The change gives more control to Pentagon overseers, the source says.

The Wynne memo also suggests relocating portions of the stockpile which Congress currently bars. "The Army should also address safeguarding the chemical weapons stockpile, as needed, to minimize any additional risk incurred, including relocation if necessary among sites," it says. The CWWG spokesman says the suggestion is a "non-starter" politically, noting that a 1988 ROD found transportation would pose greater risks.

A DOD spokeswoman Jan. 5 declined to say how the new ADM would influence the FY06 budget, and at press time could not be reached for comment on the allegations cited by CWWG. In similar Dec. 14 letters to Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-KY) and Rep. Ben Chandler (D- KY), Wynne responded to requests to ensure full funding requests for the Kentucky facility and support of "safe and expeditious demilitarization" of the weapons. Wynne would only say in response that he had not yet made any decisions regarding the demilitarization program, while assuring them of the department's continued commitment to the program.