136th Year... and still on the job!	Tuesday February 15, 2005

Fed to attend Feb. 23 meeting on chem demil

Defense Department executive expected to explain the agency's decision calling for a new study of the Pueblo project.

A key Defense Department administrator plans to attend a Feb. 23 community advisory panel meeting to discuss the status of the proposed Pueblo Chemical Depot weapons destruction plant, panel chair John Klomp said Monday in a briefing with county commissioners.

Pat Wakefield, among the Defense Department executives with hands-on responsibility for chemical weapons destruction programs across the nation, will attend the state Chemical Demilitarization Citizens Advisory Commission meeting at the Pueblo Convention Center, Klomp said.

Wakefield's scheduled visit follows a period when local and state leaders complained loudly about a lack of information coming out of Washington, D.C., regarding the status of the estimated $1.6 billion to $2.6 billion Pueblo proposal, which recently was put on a three-month hold to allow for more study.

Klomp, who chairs the advisory panel, applauded the Defense Department's decision to send a top representative to the Feb. 23 meeting, although he also said he does not expect Wakefield to go beyond recent published reports explaining the agency's decision to call for the new study of the Pueblo project.

The study will focus on the escalating costs associated with the proposed Pueblo plant, and also revisit the issue of whether shipping the weapons to an existing out-of-state destruction plant would prove more cost effective. Local and state leaders oppose any transporting of the weapons.

"I think you're going to see them repeat what we've read; that perhaps Sens. Allard and Salazar misunderstood them, and that it (the study) is necessary," Klomp said.

Sen. Wayne Allard and Sen. Ken Salazar had reported that they were assured the idea of shipping the weapons remained off the table.

The results of the study are expected by March 31.

Pueblo County Commissioner Matt Peulen said he questions the Defense Department's stated motives for the delay. He thinks the Pueblo plant, the last of two such plants still in the early stages, may be delayed simply as part of the federal government's efforts to balance the budget, he said.

"If the philosophy has changed, it's because there was something that happened in 2004, and that was an election," Peulen said, a reference to the re-election of President Bush, who promised new spending controls to address the federal budget deficit.

If rising costs associated with the Pueblo project are a concern Ñ the most recent design calls for a larger plant that would cost an estimated $2.6 billion to build and operate over 10 years, up from the original $1.6 billion forecast Ñ the fault rests with the government, Klomp said.

Defense administrators, seeking a faster plant that could cut down on the future operating costs, recommended a larger plant, Klomp said. If the administrators now want to go back to the plan for a smaller plant, the local advisory group would support the decision, he said.

Elsewhere, the Feb. 23 citizens' advisory group meeting comes during a period of transition for the Pueblo project on a variety of oversight levels, Klomp noted.

Among the ongoing developments:

• Changeover continues in the Department of Defense as Bush begins his second term.
• Project contractor Bechtel recently announced it was transferring its Pueblo project manager to an existing weapons destruction plant. A new project manager is to be named.
• And, locally, county commissioners continue to await word from Gov. Bill Owens about their request for him to name the county's new representative to the advisory panel.

The new appointment would succeed Klomp, a former county commissioner term-limited from seeking re-election. Klomp said he would like to stay on the advisory board as a private citizen, or as possibly a special liaison between the advisory panel and the federal government. The Defense Department recently offered to cover his travel costs if he serves as a liaison, he said.