[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 151 (2005), Part 8]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page 11608]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                   STATEMENT ON PUEBLO CHEMICAL DEPOT

                                 ______
                                 

                            HON. MARK UDALL

                              of colorado

                    in the house of representatives

                         Thursday, May 26, 2005

  Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. Speaker, I am glad that the Pueblo 
Chieftain recognized in a May 18 editorial the attention Representative 
John Salazar has focused on the demilitarization project at the Pueblo 
Chemical Depot, a former chemical weapons site located in southeastern 
Colorado, since he was sworn into office in January.
  Representative Salazar is aware, as I am as a member of the Colorado 
delegation and of the Armed Services Committee in the House, that a 
continued flow of funds to the demilitarization project is critical. 
That's why I was pleased that the Defense Authorization bill reported 
out of the Armed Services Committee last week and voted on by the House 
yesterday includes language directing the Secretary of the Army to 
continue to implement fully the neutralization technology at Pueblo. 
Coloradans were alarmed last year when the demilitarization project was 
put on hold, so they want to see that the Defense Department is 
committed to using the neutralization technology to destroy the 2,600 
tons of mustard agent stored at Pueblo--not transporting the weapons to 
a different site for destruction.
  I also want to call attention to language in the bill that would 
transfer program responsibility from the Under Secretary of Defense for 
Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics to the Secretary of the Army. I 
understand that objection to this transfer in the past was due to the 
preference of the Program Manager for Chemical Destruction under the 
Department of the Army for baseline incineration. Now that the Defense 
Department is committed to the neutralization approach, and given the 
numerous GAO reports and testimony to Congress stating that effective 
management of the chemical demilitarization program has been hindered 
by the complexity of its management structure, it appears to make sense 
to pursue the transfer. Still, I've asked Chairman Hunter to follow 
this move closely to ensure that this proposed change in oversight of 
the project doesn't change the path forward for the development of the 
neutralization technology.
  I'm glad that both Democratic and Republican members of the Colorado 
delegation understand the importance of getting the job done right at 
Pueblo. I will continue to work with my colleagues to ensure this 
happens.
  For the benefit of my colleagues, I've attached a May 18 editorial 
from the Pueblo Chieftain.

               [From the Pueblo Chieftain, May 18, 2005]

                           Trust, But Verify

       There appears to be bureaucratic wrangling over control of 
     the chemical weapons destruction program at Pueblo Chemical 
     Depot, and Representative John Salazar is pledging to keep a 
     close eye on developments.
       Representative Salazar reports that the Army approached him 
     directly with information that the Pentagon wants the job 
     under the direct oversight of the Army, rather than the 
     Assembled Chemical Weapons Alternative program, or ACWA. ACWA 
     has been the agency favored by local critics of the Army, 
     which originally planned to build an incinerator to 
     demilitarize the weapons.
       Representative Salazar, taking note of recent developments 
     in Congress to get the work back on track after numerous 
     delays, said the Army's track record warrants close 
     monitoring to see that nothing else gets derailed. It was 
     this long series of delays which earlier this month prompted 
     Congress to approve provisions in a supplemental budget bill 
     that included $327 million and explicit language requiring 
     the Pentagon to destroy the weapons at Pueblo and the Blue 
     Grass Chemical Depot in Kentucky. This week the Senate Armed 
     Services Committee added $20 million.
       The demilitarization provision was co-sponsored by 
     Colorado's two senators, Wayne Allard and Ken Salazar, and 
     Representative Salazar.
       Ross Vincent, a member of the local Citizens Advisory 
     Commission and a supporter of ACWA, is wary of having the 
     Army take direct control of the project. The Army may realize 
     it needs to mend fences, because Representative Salazar made 
     a point of noting that the Army volunteered the information 
     that the Pentagon now wants that military branch to be in 
     direct control.
       Representative Salazar has sized up the situation quickly 
     since his House induction in January. We are pleased that has 
     given the chemical depot his considerable attention.
       We also would encourage the congressional delegation to 
     press the Pentagon to do all of the demilitarization work 
     here. There has been some discussion of perhaps shipping 
     explosives and the neutralized mustard agent known as 
     ``hydrolysat'' off site for final destruction at other 
     plants.
       It's estimated that such transfers would mean the loss of 
     about 200 jobs that otherwise would be created at Pueblo 
     Chemical Depot. But at what cost?
       The Pentagon is looking at one cost factor, though. Last 
     week officials said they may use some recycled parts from a 
     similar system that has finished its work at Aberdeen Proving 
     Grounds in Maryland. If that could be a net savings to 
     taxpayers, we're all for it.
       Delays and mismanagement have skyrocketed the cost of 
     destroying this Nation's chemical weapons. The sooner the job 
     gets done, the better.

                          ____________________