US to miss deadline for destroying chemical weapons
The United States will miss a 2007 treaty deadline for destroying chemical weapons stockpiles, and the cost of getting rid of them will be $9bn (£6bn) more than expected, a Pentagon official told lawmakers yesterday.
In a meeting with three Alabama lawmakers, EC ‘‘Pete’’ Aldridge Jr, undersecretary of defence for acquisition, technology and logistics, said he altered the completion schedule for at least four of eight incineration sites to answer safety concerns from surrounding residents.
Last spring, an internal Army memo revealed doubts on whether the deadline could be met and concluded that it could require up to 11 extra years to destroy all of the weapons.
At the time, Pentagon officials dismissed that as a worst-case scenario.
Aldridge assured Alabama’s lawmakers that neither the start date nor the end date for burning weapons in Anniston, Alabama, would take precedent over safety.
He planned to give similar assurances to lawmakers from the other seven states that house stockpiles.
The Associated Press has learned that Anniston would finish last under the new schedule, with mid-2009 now an optimistic goal.
Sites in Pine Bluff, Arkansas; Umatilla, Oregon; and Newport, Indiana will also miss the deadline, and a completion date hasn’t been determined for Blue Grass, Kentucky, and Pueblo, Colorado. Only Aberdeen, Maryland, and Tooele, Utah, which has already begun burning, remain on track to beat the treaty deadline.
Aldridge also said the cost of incineration is now estimated at $24bn, up from the $15bn (£10bn) originally projected.
The Army has stockpiled nearly 30,000 tons of the deadly chemicals, which had been scheduled to be destroyed by 2007 as part of an international chemical weapons treaty.
Anniston, home to an incinerator that will burn the aging chemicals at its Army depot, is expected to start trial burns in April. However, a General Account Office report released in August concluded that community, along with the Kentucky and Indiana sites, do not have adequate emergency preparation standards in place.
