Published: February 21, 2010
Depot group gets idea of its fate
Future remains murky, according to officials.
By JOHN NORTON
THE PUEBLO CHIEFTAIN
The local agency that subleases space at the Pueblo Chemical Depot may have moved a step closer to getting some idea of its official status Wednesday, but the picture remains fuzzy.
Chuck Finley, executive director of the development authority at the Pueblo Chemical Depot, said he hoped that by the end of the year it should become more clear where the base and the authority stand within the Defense Department’s realignment program.
The chemical depot was put on the Base Realignment and Closure list in 1988, and over the years all of the Army’s programs, weapons and equipment were moved out — except for 780,000 weapons containing mustard agent that will remain there until they’re washed out on site and the agent neutralized or destroyed in some other manner.
Because of that stockpile, which by law cannot be moved, the base has remained in limbo for years. The development authority has been somewhat successful in renting out igloos, warehouses and other spaces outside the highly-secure stockpile but has not been able to bring in other high-profile tenants.
For example, Helios Energy wanted to install solar energy arrays, but the financial structure of the deal required a 25-year lease, something the authority can’t grant because it might not be around that long. The Front Range Energy Consortium, another solar program that would help meet federal requirements for renewable energy used by Colorado’s military bases, also is interested but faces a similar problem.
Until now, the authority has been working as if covered by BRAC rules but on Wednesday, Tom Lederle of the Army’s BRAC office said it was his opinion that that was no longer the case.
“I’m not honestly sure why this should be considered a BRAC installation at this time, at least in the classical sense,” he told the authority board.
Lederle said the plan called for realignment, and that was done by 1994. If the base was meant to be closed, it would have been put on the 2005 BRAC list with other chemical weapons facilities, like Deseret in Utah and Umatilla in Oregon.
That raised more questions about the master lease the authority uses and the status of the authority itself, but Lederle said, “It will not change the status of the lease agreement. Army installations lease out excess property all the time.”
One effect would be that the authority would not get free surplus equipment from the Army, but he added that could be a mixed blessing, as much of that is not in good shape.
Not being under BRAC, he said, might also mean more environmental cleanup funds, which also was good news for the local group.
Authority Chairman Marv Stein asked Lederle for help with another issue, helping make the Pueblo base available to store items from Fort Carson.
Another federal official, Paul Oskvarek of the Office of Economic Adjustment, also attended Wednesday’s meeting. The OEA provides help to communities affected by military programs. Board members asked him to explore finding help paying for a strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats or “SWOT” study, used by businesses to develop strategies. The board has asked for proposals from consultants and generally agreed Wednesday the price tags were very high.
The authority members also got the annual financial report, which showed that revenue was $412,268 last year, up from 2008 by $4,125. However, by the end of the year, the number of square feet rented out fell by 28 percent, in large part because of recession-related cutbacks by tenants.
norton@chieftain.com