Chemical depot's new chapter

Most Utahns assumed that when the incineration of the aging stock of chemical weapons stored at the Army's Deseret Chemical Depot concluded, the depot would close.

But the depot may have a new chapter after the Base Realignment and Closure Commission voted Wednesday to have the military study whether the chemical destruction plant could be converted to dispose conventional weapons such as aging shells, rockets and missile parts. If this use for the incinerator is not feasible, the depot would close. But a retrofitted destruction facility would preserve hundreds of jobs, if not create new employment in Tooele County.

Enthusiasm over the decision needs to be tempered with caution. The Pentagon must not view this decision as an opportunity to reconsider moving chemical weapons from depots out of state for destruction in Utah, as some environmentalists fear will occur. Previously, the Pentagon had considered shipping chemical weapons from the Pueblo (Colo.) Chemical Depot to Utah but backed off the proposal because of public outcry and the objections of Utah's and Colorado's congressional delegations.

At the present time, the transport of chemical weapons is prohibited under federal law. That's for good reason. Just this week, the Pueblo depot reported a low-level leak of mustard agent. The agent was not released into the atmosphere but the incident is indicative of the type of risks that would be encountered in any attempt to move the aging weapon stockpile.

But it is also understood that the destruction program is years behind schedule. Chemical weapons stored in Utah, Colorado, Oregon, Arkansas, Alabama, Indiana, Kentucky and Maryland are supposed to be destroyed by 2012 under an international agreement. Some depots have yet to build destruction facilities, which are highly expensive. The Utah facility, for example, cost approximately $1 billion, according to published reports.

It is a substantial investment in taxpayer dollars and the BRAC is correct that other uses for the facility should be considered. Such deliberations must carefully consider the environmental impacts of destroying conventional weapons, the cost of retrofitting the incinerator to destroy conventional weapons and the eventual clean-up of the depot when its life expires.

The prospect of new and ongoing employment is always attractive but Utah must go into a potential new phase for the incinerator with its eyes wide open.