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


Vol. 13, No. 18--September 6, 2005


BRAC PLAN FOR UTAH CHEM WEAPONS INCINERATOR DRAWS ACTIVISTS' CRITICISM

Environmentalists are criticizing a decision by the BRAC Commission to order a study of the practicality of eventually converting a chemical weapons incinerator in Utah into a conventional munitions incineration facility,  rather than simply closing the plant down in the 2005 round of base closures as DOD had recommended.

The BRAC Commission voted Aug. 24 to only close the Deseret Chemical Depot, which is located in Tooele, UT, if the study shows that converting the Tooele Chemical Agent Disposal Facility located on the depot is not feasible.

The commission's vote follows lobbying by Utah's Republican lawmakers to extend the mission of the plant, according to a letter the lawmakers sent to the commission last July.

The commission also voted Aug. 24 to delay the closure of the Umatilla Chemical Depot in Oregon and the Newport Chemical Depot in Indiana until completion of the chemical munitions destruction campaign, rather than by a prescribed date, as DOD had advised. Environmentalists are praising those decisions saying it will ensure that DOD completes destruction required by the Chemical Weapons Convention.

The commission's decision on chemical weapons facilities comes after commissioners had considered retaining the three depots due to concerns over the Army's ability to complete its chemical weapons destruction campaign by 2011 - the date by which BRAC bases must complete closure. DOD in a wide-ranging Aug. 16 paper to the commission maintained the position that it expects to complete chemical demilitarization at these three plants by 2011, and noted that the 20-year value of closing these facilities within DOD's suggested timetable would produce a savings of $1.5 billion.

But one environmentalist says that with funding cutbacks and cost overruns in the chemical demilitarization program, it is inevitable that these plants will run right up against the 2012 extended deadline for destroying stockpiled chemical munitions under the chemical weapons treaty.

It is much more practical to delay closure until the Army completes its destruction campaign, says the source, with the environmental group Global Green USA.

A spokeswoman for the Army's Chemical Materials Agency (CMA) defends the military timetable for destroying weapons at these sites by 2012, noting while it will be challenging, particularly at Umatilla, the deadline is doable.

However, environmentalists are questioning the wisdom of converting the Deseret depot into a site for demilitarizing conventional weapons. The incineration facility's age and the Army's ability to thoroughly clean the Working Group (CWWG).

This source questions how the Army would be able to certify the facility is free of chemical agent, thereby allowing conventional weapons processing to take place. Conventional weapons processing does not require the same level of worker protection measures as chemical agent processing, according to the source. Further, the plant was only designed to operate for up to seven years, but has now operated for nine years, the source notes.

"The thought of doing closed burn of conventional weapons is a step in the right direction," as compared to the Army's past use of open burn/open detonation, says the Global Green source. But this source says converting a facility that now destroys weapons of mass destruction into a conventional facility could be "impractical, highly costly and potentially dangerous."

The CMA spokeswoman adds that chemical demilitarization facilities are "almost overdesigned" in terms of safety. As a result, they are expensive to operate and maintain.

Finally, such a conversion would breach promises made by the Army, Pentagon and Congress several years ago to communities surrounding chemical demilitarization facilities that the facilities would not be used for other purposes, the CWWG source says.

However, four Utah GOP Congress members urged the BRAC Commission in a July 26 letter to consider the conversion idea as a smart investment, both financially and environmentally.

The facility cost $1 billion, they note. "This large investment should not be abandoned," they write. "It would be a more responsible use of taxpayer funds, as well as more environmentally-friendly, to consider converting the chemical destruction plant to a conventional munitions disposal operation rather than completely dismantling and tearing-down this facility." The letter is available on InsideEPA. com. See page 2 for details.

While Congress originally barred use of the chemical demilitarization facilities for other purposes, in 1999 it loosened that restriction, requiring the secretary of the Army and governor of the state to approve destruction or any further use of the facility. In addition, such a conversion would require a change in law and congressional appropriations, the congressional letter says.

The letter urged the commission to reconsider the results of a study requested by Congress in 1991, which questioned the economics of conversion. "We believe that the report's economic arguments should be re-evaluated and balanced in light of the ever-growing stockpile of obsolete conventional munitions, and greatly increased environmental restrictions against most forms of existing conventional disposal methods during the intervening years since that report was completed," the letter says.

DOD in its BRAC evaluations estimated the cost to complete cleanup of the Deseret depot at $66.9 million.

The BRAC commission has until Sept. 8 to submit its final recommendations on the 2005 BRAC round to the president.