[CPEO-MEF] GAO Report on Ammo Demil

[Lenny Siegel <lsiegel@cpeo.org>]

In April, 2001, the General Accounting Office issued a report providing
insights into the environmental consequences of the Army's disposal of
excess conventional munitions on behalf of the entire Defense
Department. "Defense Inventory: Steps the Army Can Take to Improve the
Management and Oversight of Excess Munitions" (GAO-01-372) goes beyond
environmental issues, questioning the cost effectiveness of the current
mix of government-owned and contractor-owned demilitarization capacity.

According to the report and the Defense Department's included response:

* At the end of 2000 the Defense Department's reported stockpile of
excess ammunition totaled 493,000 tons. GAO reports, however, that "if
all known and forecasted excess ammunition were recognized, the
demilitarization liability for the Army could be as much as 2.9 million
tons." Though the larger figure is based on uncertain assumptions, it
would mean that the total liability exceeds $3 billion.

* Because of environmental concerns, Congress is pressuring the Army to
phase out open burning/open detonation (OB/OD) as a means of stockpile
demilitarization. It has told the Defense Department to write a report,
by September 30, 2001, on  the feasibility of replacing OB/OD with
closed disposal technologies.

* GAO appears to lump incineration with resource recovery as an
environmentally friendly demilitarization technology, at least in
comparison to OB/OD. In many instances, resource recovery turns out to
be more cost effective than incineration. The Defense Department cites a
contract it awarded to dispose of small arms:  "[the] small arms
ammunition ... were being demilitarized by private industry contract
through a resource recovery methodology at a cost of $1 a ton (versus
$1,200 to $1,500 for incineration at a government facility.)"

* Many munitions being destroyed now are more complex and difficult to
demilitarize than typical excess weapons in the past.

* According to the Defense Department, "The most [cost-] effective
demilitarization program would be to maximize open burn/open detonation
with Sierra Army Depot being workloaded at capacity." The Department is
not suggesting that; it's just replying to GAO's claim that the excess
disposal program is not sufficiently cost-effective. Clearly, at this
point Congress, environmental regulators, and the public want
environmental protection considered in the selection of demil technologies.


GAO reports may be downloaded from http://www.gao.gov or ordered by
phone (first copy free) from 202/512-6000.


Lenny Siegel

-- 


Lenny Siegel
Director, Center for Public Environmental Oversight
c/o PSC, 222B View St., Mountain View, CA 94041
Voice: 650/961-8918 or 650/969-1545
Fax: 650/968-1126
lsiegel@cpeo.org
http://www.cpeo.org

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~