Weapons disposal delay likely
Pueblo's budget cut could affect Blue Grass Army Depot

By Peter Mathews
CENTRAL KENTUCKY BUREAU

RICHMOND - A substantial funding cut contained within President Bush's proposed fiscal 2005 budget could mean delays in the destruction of chemical weapons at Blue Grass Army Depot.

The cut came not at the depot itself but at its sister site in Pueblo, Colo. The $2.4 trillion budget submitted to Congress on Monday calls for Pueblo's funding to be cut from $151.7 million to $4.9 million for the fiscal year that begins Oct. 1.

The sites will use similar designs and technology. The same contractor -- joint venture Bechtel Parsons -- is designing and will operate both facilities.

"If in fact the budget cut stands, Pueblo's certainly going to be affected schedule-wise," said Bill Pehlivanian, deputy program manager of the Assembled Chemical Weapons Alternatives program. That is the Defense Department agency overseeing the chemical neutralization process at the two sites.

The demilitarization process at Pueblo is nine to 12 months ahead of the depot in Richmond, said Craig Williams, executive director of the Chemical Weapons Working Group.

If the budget cut halts design work and testing in Colorado, the depot will be unable to incorporate the results into its plans. Therefore, Williams suggested, the Madison County facility may find itself unable to spend much of the $105.8 million it is allotted for research and development in the budget.

"It's an ominous sign," said Williams, whose organization opposes incineration and favors the alternative technologies being used at Pueblo and the depot.

Williams said he sees it as the first in a series of cuts "that have the potential to result in a significant schedule delay here in Kentucky."

Much of the money the Army would save at Pueblo would go to sites using incineration to destroy weapons. Anniston, Ala., for example, would get a $10 million increase over its fiscal 2004 funding, and the site at Umatilla, Ore., would get $31 million more.

Williams said those sites have had to spend millions on new equipment because of problems encountered in the incineration process.

"They're throwing good money after bad based on a technology choice that does not operate as advertised," he said.

Under an international treaty, the United States is supposed to have its chemical weapons destroyed by April 2012.

Last February, the Defense Department decided to destroy the 523 tons of blister and nerve agent stored at the depot by using chemical neutralization followed by supercritical water oxidation.

Because of increased concerns about terrorism, the Pentagon directed the Army and ACWA to accelerate the demilitarization program at both the depot and Pueblo.

But in November, an internal Pentagon draft memorandum told ACWA to halt design work at Pueblo, saying the accelerated plan is "not executable" within the fiscal 2004 budget.

After a copy of the memo was obtained by the Chemical Weapons Working Group, the memo was never sent, Williams said.

A week later, the four U.S. senators from Kentucky and Colorado wrote to the Pentagon to say it "would be unacceptable for the (Defense) Department to slow disposal at some sites to speed disposal at others."

They asked the Pentagon for "a thorough explanation justifying any slowing down of the demilitarization process" in their states.

In its response, the Pentagon did not directly address those concerns, but said it had requested an analysis of design alternatives. Pehlivanian said that analysis could be complete by March.

"This is strictly a cost issue," Williams contends. "It's not about safety. It's not about viability."

A call to the office of Patrick Wakefield, a deputy assistant to the secretary of defense, was not returned. A Pentagon spokes-woman, Maj. Sandra Burr, asked that questions be submitted electronically but did not respond to an e-mail.

Bush's budget could be changed substantially in Congress, so the budget cut for Pueblo might not stand.