Defense Environment Alert 02/08/04

Defense Environment Alert

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

Vol. 13, No. 2--January 25, 2005

CHEMICAL WEAPONS PROGRAM CUTS, RELOCATION PLANS OPPOSED

Key lawmakers and citizen activists are opposing recently revealed DOD plans to severely slash funding for chemical weapons destruction facilities to be built in Kentucky and Colorado, and to possibly relocate the stockpiled weapons to other facilities.

"Recent budget decisions regarding the [Pueblo, CO, chemical weapons] depot clearly indicate a new path that is inconsistent with promises made to Congress, the state of Colorado and to the local community," Sen. Wayne Allard (R-CO) said in a statement. "I will fight the department tooth and nail on this issue until my concerns and the concerns of the people of Pueblo are addressed."

The destruction facilities under design in Blue Grass, KY, and Pueblo, CO, comprise DOD's Assembled Chemical Weapons Alternatives (ACWA) program, which Congress established to force the military to consider alternative, destruction methods to incineration. Moving the weapons to another facility could disregard years of effort by DOD, citizens and lawmakers that produced a consensus on a plan to dispose of assembled chemical weapons at the two sites using neutralization.

The investigation into relocating the weapons sites comes as DOD has formulated a budget proposal for the ACWA program that would severely cut and therefore delay the design and construction of ACWA neutralization plants for several years, outside sources say. The proposed cuts, however, have already raised alarm bells among members of the House and Senate, who are pledging to fight any such reductions and restore the money legislatively.

Internal budget documents obtained by the national citizens coalition Chemical Weapons Working Group (CWWG) reveal DOD plans to drastically cut funding for the ACWA sites until fiscal year 2011 -just one year before the United States, if granted an extension under the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC), will be required to have all of its stockpiled chemical weapons destroyed. According to the plan, DOD would only begin funding construction of the two plants in FYI 1. Relevant documents are available on InsideEPA.com. See page 2for details.

From FY06 through FY10, DOD is proposing to fund the two ACWA sites at a little over $31 million annually, rather than the $2 billion the budget documents say the two sites need over those five years to meet schedule plans.

Allard met with DOD officials on the matter Jan. 17 to question DOD's plans for the program, he said in a statement. At the meeting, DOD "agreed to clarify the direction for the Pueblo project," a DOD spokeswoman says. Allard's press office could not be reached for comment on the outcome of the meeting.

Allard, Rep. John Salazar (D-CO) and Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-KY) in statements and letters all voiced their opposition to delaying disposal at the two ACWA sites, citing both security and environmental risks posed by continued storage. Sen. Ken Salazar (D-CO) also sent a letter to DOD asking about the reduced funding plan for the ACWA sites, the DOD spokeswoman says. A spokesperson for his office could not be reached for comment.

"These plans will virtually halt disposal activities at the two sites," CWWG says in a Jan. 12 press release on the leaked documents. "This funding approach makes compliance with the 2012 [CWC] deadline impossible, and is an admission by the United States that it is backing off its obligations regarding the Treaty," Williams said in the press release.

The DOD spokeswoman would not comment on the budget proposal until the FY06 budget request is released Feb. 7.

Meanwhile, citizen activists at chemical weapons stockpile sites across the country are vowing to press lawmakers and governors to oppose the DOD's recent decision to consider transporting stockpiles stored in Kentucky and Colorado for disposal at other Army disposal facilities.

DOD is weighing the relocation option in an attempt to avoid missing the 2012 CWC stockpile destruction deadline, according to the Army's Chemical Materials Agency (CMA).

The investigation into relocation options "will be done in an effort to help the United States achieve the extended 2012 CWC 100% destruction milestone," Michael Parker said in a Jan. 19 statement. Parker is both director of the Army's CMA and program manager for DOD's ACWA program.

The relocation study is part of a larger effort established by DOD acquisition head Michael Wynne in a Dec. 21, 2004, policy memo that lowered the funding priority for the ACWA program and called for developing alternatives--including relocation--for the ACWA sites in order to still achieve the 2012 CWC deadline or if necessary delay the ACWA program to make design changes to the program's neutralization technology (Defense Environment Alert, Jan. 11, p6).

Wynne says a delay may be necessary due to "external constraints the program must address." Previously, DOD has tried to shift funding from the Colorado site to help pay for needs at the Army's other chemical demilitarization sites (Defense Environment Alert, May 18, 2004, p9).

In response to the Wynne directive, DOD chemical demilitarization official Patrick Wakefield has asked the Army and DOD ACWA program to study the relocation option and report back to him by Feb. 18.

Wynne's memo does not specify which sites should be considered for accepting additional agent, a CMA spokesman says.

In response to written questions on the relocation proposal, the DOD spokeswoman concedes federal law currently bars such shipments, and would only say DOD "directed alternatives be developed that are safe and cost effective, which include considering relocation as an alternative."

CWWG Director Craig Williams, speaking to reporters Jan. 19, said citizens at all of the stockpile sites are working with their congressional delegations to oppose shipments of chemical weapons, adding that he believes the only solution to avert this is to push for full funding for the entire chemical weapons disposal program.

"That is the only recipe for assured timely disposal and elimination of the transportation option," he said.

Citizen activists question how a plan to transport weapons for consolidated disposal would save either time or money, noting the opposition and time delays the Army has faced in trying to ship secondary waste from neutralized chemical agent from its Newport, IN, facility to a commercial facility. Williams said the idea that transportation of weapons for consolidated disposal would save money is just speculation.

In order for DOD to move forward on a transportation plan it would either have to convince Congress to change existing law barring such shipments or convince the president to issue an executive order or some other declaration of a national emergency that trumps existing law, Williams said.

In addition, the proposal would likely face widespread political opposition, and require changes to state-issued permits for those facilities accepting the additional weapons, the activists say.

Transportation of the stockpiles would entail shipping 101,764 configured weapons weighing 523 tons from the Kentucky site, and transporting 780,078 configured weapons weighing 2,611 tons from the Colorado site, according to Williams.