A Newsletter of the Chemical Weapons Working Group
Published by the Kentucky Environmental Foundation
Congress continues support of alternative technologies
The United States has tentatively agreed to fund up to $18 million to continue demonstration and implementation of safe, cost-effective technologies for destroying the nation's chemical weapons stockpile without incineration. The bipartisan action, by Senators Wendell Ford (D-KY) and Mitch McConnell (R-KY), is designed to accelerate the Assembled Chemical Weapons Assessment (ACWA) Program, independent of the Army's plans to build incinerators to burn nerve and mustard agent. Under ACWA, six technologies are currently being evaluated. An announcement of those which meet criteria for proceeding to the demonstration phase is expected later this month.
The ACWA program was established in 1996 under the Defense Appropriations Act (DAA), with the mission of identifying and demonstrating no less than two alternative technologies to incineration for assembled chemical weapons stored at six sites in the U.S. The DAA language also prohibited funding for incineration construction in Kentucky and Colorado until the alternatives demonstration program has been completed.
In his statement supporting their proposal, Senator McConnell said the reason for continuing with the alternatives program is because he "remain[s] disappointed with the Army's incineration program," and that if safe alternatives can be found, "Congress should support that endeavor." Senator Ford noted that development of a non-incineration technology "will be a tremendous victory for the citizens of central Kentucky."
What the legislation won't do is stop the incineration program from moving forward at the other stockpile sites. Incinerator construction has already begun in Alabama and Oregon, while a draft permit for an incinerator in Arkansas was released on June 28th. Chemical weapons incinerators in the Pacific and in Utah have been plagued with shutdowns due to technical and operational problems, including releases of live chemical agent into the environment. Although funding for incineration has not been stopped for Alabama, Congressman Riley stated in May 1998 that "my constituents should not be locked into incineration if a proven alternative technology is available in the next few years."
Citizens living near the nine U.S. chemical weapons stockpile sites are encouraged with the Congressional support for alternatives, and will continue to fight incineration. Chemical Weapons Working Group spokesperson Craig Williams stated "The continued funding of the ACWA program demonstrates the viability of alternatives to incineration. It is encouraging that Congress recognizes the need to continue this effort. These funds will ensure ACWA's ability to transition from demonstrations to implementation without wasting time."
David Christian, with Serving Alabama's Future Environment, stated, "Even as the alternative technologies program is moving forward, foundations for incinerators are being laid in Alabama and Oregon. If safer technologies are available for Maryland, Indiana and being developed for Kentucky and Colorado, they should be made available to all chemical weapons sites."
Alabama health officials say "Don't eat the fish"
Recreational fishing is a popular sport in northeastern Alabama, but in June 1998, Alabama health officials issued fish consumption advisories for over 15 area rivers and lakes. The advisories were issued following the Alabama Department of Environmental Management annual sampling of fish tissues. ADEM found that the fish tissues contained levels of PCBs, heavy metals and other toxic compounds that exceeded federal health standards. Incineration and chemical production and manufacturing processes are some primary sources of these dangerous chemicals.
Toxic chemicals like PCBs are persistent in the environment, meaning that once they enter the air, water and soil they stay there for decades. These chemicals enter the food chain, eventually poisoning the humans that eat -- in this case -- contaminated fish. ADEM's fish advisory recommended limited consumption of some types of fish, and to simply avoid others.
In a June press release from the Alabama Department of Health, fisheries expert Bob Reinert of the University of Georgia said "The levels of mercury in certain areas appear to be going up, probably from an increase in incineration and the things that humans do." ADEM spokesman Clark Bruner said that a former Monsanto plant in Anniston could be blamed for some of the PCB contamination. Mike Thompson of the Alabama Coastal Fishermen's Association said "We really need more clean industry in our area."
With persistent chemicals already affecting Alabama's fish food chain, to add another polluting facility like the proposed Anniston chemical weapons incinerator would only make a bad problem worse. Chemical weapons incinerators are known to release PCBs, heavy metals and dioxins into the environment. Yet ADEM released a permit in 1997 to begin construction of a chemical weapons incinerator at the Anniston Army Depot.
Brenda Lindell of Families Concerned About Nerve Gas Incineration, said "Here we have ADEM on the one hand telling people the fish in lakes and rivers around Anniston are contaminated, and on the other hand, ADEM allows a permit for another incinerator which will further pollute our air, water and food. It just doesn't make sense."
Arkansas groups submit petition to extent comment period on chemical weapons incinerator permit
Citizen organizations and individuals throughout Arkansas have submitted a petition to Governor Huckabee and the Arkansas Department of Pollution Control and Ecology (PC&E) requesting an extension of the public comment period on the Draft Permit for a chemical weapons incinerator at the Pine Bluff Arsenal. The draft permit, issued by PC&E on June 29, could lead to a permit for the construction of an incinerator to burn the 3,850 tons of chemical warfare agents and hundreds of thousands of tons of explosives and other related components currently stored at the Arsenal.
In releasing the draft permit, PC&E granted a 70-day public comment period. However, citizen groups closely watching the chemical weapons disposal issue have requested a year in which to provide comments, arguing that Arkansas, in the state's history, has never considered such a complex permit. "The PC&E has been reviewing this permit for more than 10 years," said Evelyn Yates, the director of Pine Bluff for Safe Disposal. "To give citizens less than three months to review it and submit comments is simply not fair."
The citizens' petition, signed by six attorneys, three private citizens and eleven Arkansas organizations, including four veterans groups, states that because the draft incinerator permit is the most costly, complex and technical ever reviewed by the PC&E, it should be given the longest comment period of any draft permit issued by the State. To bolster the argument for a longer comment period, the petition also cites the Federal Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) guidance on public participation. RCRA guidance calls for "expanded public participation in permitting" thereby "providing the public with an expanded role in the permit process."
Arkansas Attorney Gregory Ferguson, who filed the petition, said, "If there was ever a case where the public should be granted a significant extension to review a permit, this is it!" Ferguson also noted that when a similar petition was submitted in Oregon, their Governor granted a six- month extension to the original 60-day comment period. "The Arkansas situation is even more complex than Oregon's." said Ferguson. "83% of the Arsenal's chemical weapons stockpile consists of the same material as the Maryland stockpile, which will be destroyed by non-incineration methods. The fact that other non-incineration technologies are currently being tested, and could be applicable to chemical weapons in Pine Bluff, means we deserve a longer, more complete comment period."
The Maryland stockpile contains only Mustard agents in ton containers which will be destroyed by neutralization and biological treatments. Arkansas citizens have asked that similar non-incineration disposal technologies be available for the similar portion of Pine Bluff's chemical weapon stockpile.
The Pine Bluff Chapter of the Disabled American Veterans (DAV) is one of the veteran's groups that signed the petition. DAV member Joe Steward said, "This is a common sense issue. If the agency has had eleven years to review this information, and only allows the citizens of Arkansas 70 days to look at it, then they either are in an awful hurry or don't want the permit carefully reviewed. Either way, it's not unreasonable for us to request a year to do our job. We hope the Governor and the PC&E will honor our request."
A Burning Issue at Pine Bluff
The Arkansas Chapter of Women's Actions for New Directions (WAND) sponsored a Family Walk to the Arsenal on June 7, 1998 in Pine Bluff, AR. The purpose of the Walk was "to provide as much information [on the incineration issue] to the Arkansas public as possible in order to make good decisions for our families." A pre-walk program featured Steve Jones, the former Safety Manager at the Utah chemical weapons incinerator, who was fired after raising serious safety concerns about the plant.
Following the walk, Colonel Gary Motsek, Commanding Officer for the Pine Bluff Arsenal, answered questions about chemical weapons disposal which were provided in advance by the WAND group. WAND member Sheila Witherington said the Walk "was a great success," and that WAND "exceeded our goals and have begun a long-term relationship directly with Col. Motsek."
The Walk was attended by women, children and men from many different backgrounds, some carrying red, white and blue balloons. Also attending the Walk were several individuals representing other Arkansas organizations supporting safe disposal of chemical weapons, such as Pine Bluff for Safe Disposal and the Disabled American Veterans.
Utah Legal Update
The trial of the Chemical Weapons Working Group (CWWG) against the Tooele, Utah chemical weapons incinerator, originally scheduled for August 17-31, has been postponed by Judge Tena Campbell till early 1999. The Judge's decision was based on schedule demands with her other cases.
The CWWG along with the Sierra Club and Vietnam Veterans of America Foundation, is seeking to shut down the Utah incinerator (called TOCDF) because of the risks it poses to workers, surrounding communities and the environment. The defendants in the trial are the Department of the Army and EG&G Defense Materials, Inc., the contractor responsible for operating the TOCDF facility. The trial will be our third time before Judge Campbell. In July 1996 and March 1997 the CWWG asked Campbell for a preliminary injunction, so that the incinerator could not begin operations until a full trial took place. The request for a preliminary injunction was denied, and TOCDF operations began in August 1996.
The Judge's decision to postpone the trial is a mixed blessing. The CWWG now has an opportunity for additional trial preparation and data analysis. Through the legal "discovery" process, the CWWG has obtained volumes of records on TOCDF operations since August 1996. The documents reveal several key incidents which may have put workers and the public at risk. For example, on March 30, 1998 an insufficiently- drained MC-1 bomb was fed into the metal parts furnace, causing a furnace shutdown and the highest obtainable chemical agent reading from an agent monitor in the Metal Parts Furnace duct, which feeds into the common smokestack. Other incidents reveal possible employee agent exposures and risks. Through the additional review of TOCDF documents now available to the CWWG, our case should be substantially strengthened.
Gulf War Veterans Endorse Health Bill
The National Gulf War Resource Center (NGWRC), a coalition of 51 grassroots organizations based in Washington, DC, in June 1998 announced their endorsement of a comprehensive Gulf War health care bill introduced by Representative Christopher Shays (R-CT). In less than two weeks, the bill has gained widespread support, including 37 co- sponsors in the House of Representatives.
The bill, titled "Persian Gulf War Veterans Health Act of 1998," presumes exposure to a wide array of toxins, including chemical warfare agents, for approximately 700,000 Gulf War veterans. More than 110,000 Desert Storm veterans currently suffer from Gulf War Illnesses, which include immune system disorders, respiratory problems, neurological problems and many undiagnosed conditions.
The bill establishes an independent medical panel to determine what link, if any, exists between toxic exposures and the illnesses. Once a connection between the illnesses and military service is determined, the veterans become eligible for health care and compensation. "Passage of this bill eases the burden of evidence needed by veterans to obtain government benefits," said Christ Kornkven, President of the NGWRC. "We thank Congressman Shays for introducing HR 4036. Gulf War veterans, their families, and their friends should also take credit for the many years of hard work it has taken for Congress to listen to our concerns and to act decisively. This bill is our number one priority this year," Kornkven declared.
"We remember the yellow ribbons on doors across this country during the fighting in 1990 and 1991. Starting today, we urge veterans, veterans' groups, and the public to call Washington to show their support again for veterans so we may receive the health care we desperately need," Kornkven added.
The Chemical Weapons Working Group and NGWRC have together made the link between veterans' exposures to chemical agent in the Gulf, and the potential for U.S. civilians to be exposed to agent if the Army moves forward with its chemical weapons incineration program. The experience of the Gulf War shows that we should not assume low level exposures to chemical agent are safe.
For more information on Gulf War Illness or the NGWRC, contact Paul Sullivan, Director, at (202) 628-2700 x162, or visit the web site at www.gulfweb.org/ngwrc.
1998 Chemical Weapons Working Group Conference
The April 1998 conference involved more CWWG participants and representatives from national environmental and public health organizations than ever before! The bulk of the conference was a strategy session, facilitated by Charlotte Brody of the Center for Health, Environment and Justice. The strategy session focused on the five "vulnerable" sites of Alabama, Oregon and Arkansas, where plans for incinerators continue; and Utah and the Kalama Island, where incinerators are currently operating. Indiana and Maryland's chemical weapons stockpile will be treated with non-incineration processes, while Kentucky and Colorado are in the 2nd year of a 2-year Congressional ban on spending for the incineration technology. Gina Chamberlain, from Common Ground in Kentucky, said "Even though the strategy focused on a few of the sites, it is necessary for all of us to continue working together. A victory at even one site is a victory for us all."
The overall goal of the CWWG is to replace dangerous incinerators with safe, publicly acceptable disposal technologies, as efficiently as possible. With Charlotte's help, CWWG delegates created a strategy to reach our goal, involving legislative work in an election year, and issues such as media work, direct actions, a letter-writing campaign on the connection between incineration and food contamination, and much more.
The CWWG press conference on Monday, April 6 featured members Maile Shimabukuro from Hawaii, Evelyn Yates from Arkansas, and David Christian from Alabama. Also speaking at the press conference were CWWG Spokesperson Craig Williams and Tooele, Utah chemical weapons incinerator whistleblower Steve Jones. The press conference was well- attended by television and print media, and was broadcast live on the C- Span cable channel.
Emissions from Stacks Reach your
Grocery Sacks!
CWWG Kicks off Clean Food Campaign
by Melissa Tuckey, Kentucky Environmental Foundation, and
Rufus Kinney, Families Concerned About Nerve Gas Incineration
Food producers are staying far away from Tooele, County Utah because of the threat chemical weapons incineration poses to their food. According to County Commissioner Teryl Hunsaker, "Even though where they were looking was far removed from the incinerator, they were scared to death the association would keep people from buying their products," Hunsaker told the Birmingham-Post Herald last winter. This could be bad news for the food production businesses currently located near proposed chemical weapons incinerators in Arkansas, Alabama, and Oregon.
Incinerator emissions like dioxins, lead and mercury are known to poison not only the air and water but also birds, chickens, fish, and cattle, and vegetables. The EPA reports that incinerator-produced chemicals like dioxin biomagnify and build up in the food chain and that we are exposed to as much as 1,000 to 10,000 times more dioxin in the food we eat than by inhalation.
This past June, mercury and PCB contamination forced the shut down of 16 rivers and lakes in Alabama. The Alabama Department of Health issued a warning that the fish in contaminated waters is unsafe for human consumption. Chemical contamination has poisoned food in Arkansas as well. In July of 1997, dioxin closed four Arkansas poultry plants. Hundreds of workers were idled after federal inspectors found that dioxin-contaminated feed had been used by farmers producing chicken, eggs, and catfish.
Children are the most vulnerable to such toxic chemicals. Between 1973 and 1995, children aged 0-4 years have shown an 18% increase in leukemia, a 32% increase in kidney and renal pelvis cancer, a 37% increase in soft tissue cancer, and a 53% increase in brain and nervous system cancers. In addition to causing an increase in cancers, toxic exposures can upset child development and cause learning difficulties and behavioral problems, as well as immune and reproductive system damage and birth defects.
Many food producers are becoming aware that toxic emissions threaten business. Bryan Foods, Sara Lee, Keebler, and Ohio beef cattle and vegetable growers have all opposed incinerators in recent years. Perdue Farms wrote in 1991 that "even the slightest chance of creating a situation that potentially compromises (our) major food and economic chain...should be avoided at all costs. We request that no poultry areas be considered for hazardous waste storage or incineration." Also in 1991, the 320,000 member North Carolina Farm Bureau passed a resolution opposing incineration.
Last year, Families Against Nerve Gas Incineration in Anniston, Alabama member Rufus Kinney began a letter writing campaign to local chicken producers asking them to take a stand against the Anniston incinerator. Hundreds of letters were sent to Goldkist, Tyson, and Hudson Foods. Hudson Foods responded by saying they do not support the "building of an incinerator in Alabama." Gold Kist has not yet taken a stand and Tyson expressed support of the Army's plan to burn weapons. Meanwhile, in Arkansas, similar efforts have been spear headed by Dr. Abdullah Muhammad. At our recent CWWG conference in Washington, D.C., Rufus and Abdullah proposed we launch a national campaign.
The Chemical Weapons Working Group has begun a national letter writing campaign in support of these efforts. We are asking food producers near proposed incinerators to act now to support safe technologies and oppose chemical weapons incineration. Let them know that you will buy your products from producers who act to support a healthy and clean environment.
For more information about the clean food campaign, or for an organizing packet call Melissa at (606) 986-0868. You can also visit the CWWG website at www.cwwg.org.
Call or Write to these Food Producers Today!
Mr. Leland E. Tollet
Chairman of the Board and CEO
Tyson Foods, Inc.
2210 W. Oakland Drive
Springdale, AR 72762-6900
(501) 290-4000
Tyson has chicken plants near proposed
incinerators in both Arkansas and Alabama
Gaylord O. Coan
President and Chief Operating Officer
Gold Kist Inc.
244 Perimeter Center Parkway
Atlanta, GA 30346-2302
(770) 393-5000
Gold Kist has a poultry plant in Alabama
I am aware that you have a poultry plant near proposed chemical weapons incinerators in Anniston, Alabama and Pine Bluff, Arkansas. As a customer who feeds your chicken to my family I am very concerned about the health impact of incinerator emissions on the food we consume.
I understand there are safer technologies for chemical weapons disposal available which do not release toxic chemicals into the environment.
I urge you to act now and take a stand in support of these safer technologies and protect the future of your business. Because my family's health is very important to me, I will be buying my food products from producers who take an active stand for a healthy environment.
Thank you for your concern, Jane Doe
Discussions on non-stockpile weapons continue
For the third time, citizens living near non-stockpile chemical weapons sites have met with officials with the Army's Non-Stockpile Chemical Materiel Program (NSCMP). The purpose of the May 1998 meeting was to continue discussion of issues around recovery, storage and disposal of non-stockpile chemical weapons. Non-stockpile weapons are miscellaneous items such as bombs, ton containers of chemical agent, and chemical agent identification sets, which are not part of the chemical weapons stockpile.
Participants in the May meeting were from all across the country -- from Alaska to Maryland, from Utah to Arkansas and Tennessee -- representing a diversity of issues. Some of the main discussion topics at the meeting were: transportation and storage of non-stockpile materiel; effective public involvement and outreach strategies; and primary and secondary disposal methods for non-stockpile weapons and by-products. The group also agreed on a draft charter, which, if passed, would formally name the group as the Non-Stockpile Forum. The next meeting is scheduled for November 1998, pending approval of the group charter.
If you would like more information on the non-stockpile issue, or want to know how to get involved in a growing grassroots non-stockpile network, please contact Elizabeth at (606) 986-0868.
"Public involvement" is the term we continue to hear, across the nation, at the military conferences on the destruction of chemical weapons. A May 1998 meeting between (NSCMP) officials and citizens living near non- stockpile sites was a continuation of that mantra, and one of the more promising meetings on the chemical weapons issue I have attended.
Citizen participation in the decision-making process is the most important part of "public involvement." Fortunately, the NSCMP seems to believe this is true. The NSCMP may be able to utilize "lessons learned from mistakes made in the past" by the chemical weapons stockpile incineration program. The problems and controversies over incineration have often been dealt with by the Army's old style of behavior: decide, announce and defend.
Of course, it remains to be seen how sincerely the NSCMP promotes "new" behavior. Public involvement in any democratic process has always been important and the ideal. Long after the chemical weapons have been destroyed in our nation and throughout the world, there will be other problems to confront. Has the Army found that the road toward solutions is public involvement? Hopefully the answer is yes.
-- Rosemary Holt, Women Concerned/Utahns United
Safety in the Destruction of Chemical Weapons in Russia
The point of view of several Russian citizen organizations, such as the Union for Chemical Safety, is represented in this article, on issues related to the safe disposal of chemical weapons in Russia.
Most important in this debate is the selection of technology for the disposal of Russia's chemical weapons. Those technologies which were selected on the basis of so-called "open competitions" are not, in our opinion, sufficiently persuasive from the point of view of safety. This concerns lewisite and phosphorganic substances.
It is planned to produce 2,500 tons of metallic arsenic in disposing the lewisite stockpile. In this process, an arsenic-hydrogen mixture is formed which is no less toxic then lewisite, and has an explosive potential. An assessment of the market for arsenic shows that there is no demand for such a large amount. Therefore the disposal process for lewisite should only be reviewed in terms of its ability to satisfy safety requirements. The commercialization of this process is impermissible. In the disposal of phosphorganic substances, the bituminization stage and long-term storage of the bituminized toxic wastes are subjects for concern. The volume of the bituminized waste is 5-6 greater then the original quantity of chemical agent.
In the Russian technologies for chemical weapons disposal the most controversial are the second stages of the processes. The reason for this, in our opinion, is that the technologies for chemical weapons disposal in Russia are developed by the same Institute which created the weapons, GOSNIXOT. These specialists know how to work with chemical weapons but are not able to solve the problems of how to protect the environment from the harmful impact of the products of their decomposition.
It is completely obvious that Russia, as in the US, should have a program in which the technologies being reviewed in the Assembled Chemical Weapons Assessment (ACWA) program could be presented. As a Russian version of such a program, it would be possible to propose a competition for the second stage of the processes of chemical weapons disposal. The second stage is a reactionary mass, resulting from the neutralization stage.
The funding through the Cooperative Threat Reduction (CTR) of the construction of the facility in Kurgan Oblast using technology which could prove to be ineffective, could result in the slowing down of chemical demilitarization in Russia. If proven ineffective or dangerous, the project in Kurgan Oblast could evoke substantive protests from other regions.
The funding, appropriated through the CTR program should, in our opinion, be used for the creation of safety measures and emergency planning systems for chemical weapons facilities. This is mandatory in their functioning. This funding could also be used to create an industrial infrastructure for the facilities, which could be used for all technologies: both for opening and disassembling of chemical warheads. The final decision on technology can be made only upon completion of the ACWA program in the US and the completion of an analogous program in Russia for the nerve and blister agent stockpiles.
Citizen environmental organizations in Russia strongly support the process of chemical demilitarization and the disposal of chemical weapons, as in the existing conditions the stockpile represents an increased danger for the regions of chemical weapons storage. However, safety is the fundamental requirement for this process.
Pacific incinerator gets new permit;
Army estimates 3 more years of burning
On June 11, Region 9 Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) approved a new permit for the Army's Kalama Island chemical weapons incinerator, known as the Johnston Atoll Chemical Disposal System (JACADS). Although the Army anticipates only three more years of operations before the stockpile has been destroyed, the EPA says it granted the Army a 10- year permit to include clean-up projects, including dismantling of the incinerator, and so that schedules would not take priority over safety.
In its eight years of operations thus far, JACADS has destroyed 75% of the Island's stockpile, and has undergone hundreds of modifications. JACADS has experienced fires, explosions, and many more technical and operational problems, some of which have resulted in releases of chemical agent out the smokestack. In November 1997, a plant employee was killed when, while making repairs, a large piece of equipment fell on him. The accident may have been the result of a failure to properly train employees on repairing modified equipment. Marsha Joyner, of the Pacific Asia Council of Indigenous Peoples, said "For the past ten years we have lobbied, cajoled, begged and pleaded to every leader of our 'democratic government' to get the Army and EPA to stop incineration because of what it does to the environment and human health. Hopefully the alternative methods of disposal currently being tested will be used." Other Pacific activists agree that if incineration continues, the facility must be taken apart as soon as the stockpile is destroyed, and no additional wastes must be shipped to the Island.
Many of the requirements in the new permit are more stringent than in the old one. Some differences include: Refined reporting requirements for monitoring systems; Clarified mercury and dioxin feed rate limits; Clarification of prohibition on treating off-site waste; New monitoring location requirements for the HVAC system, and; Monitoring for all types of chemical agents simultaneously when processing secondary wastes.
For more information on the Kalama Island incinerator, see the CWWG web site at www.cwwg.org, or contact our office to be put in touch with Pacific activists.
Umatilla, Morrow Counties ask for incinerator "impact fee"
Following the lead of Tooele County, Utah, officials from two Oregon counties bordering the Umatilla Army Depot have requested an "impact fee" from the government to offset costs associated with the proposed chemical weapons incinerator. A Hermiston, Oregon newspaper reported on June 30, 1998 that Umatilla and Morrow county officials are seeking $55 million in compensation for "infrastructure demands resulting from the Army's project."
In May 1996, Tooele County, Utah, home of the first continental U.S. chemical weapons incinerator, was awarded 1700 acres of industrial land and $13 million compensation for economic impacts from the incinerator. That transaction was possible because it was required by a county ordinance under the Federal Facility Compliance Act. At a House National Security committee hearing on March 5, 1998, Army officials said legislation would be required in order for other chemical weapons stockpile sites to be awarded such impact fees.
Other news from Oregon...
Three Oregon environmental organizations, GASP, the Sierra Club and the Oregon Wildlife Federation, and dozens of individuals living near the chemical weapons stockpile site at the Umatilla Army Depot will challenge the incinerator permit at a hearing on October 22nd in an attempt to stop chemical weapons incinerator. The groups are challenging the Air Quality and Hazardous Waste components of the permit. Karyn Jones with GASP, explained that the goal of the lawsuit is to halt the incineration program in favor of implementation of safer, non-incineration technologies. A decision on the lawsuit will be made in
December 1998, or early in 1999. Any Oregonians interested in the chemical weapons issue are encouraged to show their support by attending the October hearing! For more information, or to get in touch with CWWG members in Oregon, contact the CWWG office at (606) 986- 0868.
Georgians speak out on Alabama incinerator
The Coosa River Basin Initiative (C.R.B.I.) is a non-profit, grassroots organization based in Rome, Georgia concerned with water quality in the Coosa River Basin. Networking from Bradley County, Tennessee, through Northwest Georgia down to Montgomery, Alabama, the C.R.B.I. works to inform and empower citizens so they may become involved in the process of creating a cleaner, healthier, economically viable watershed. Naturally, the chemical weapons incinerator undergoing construction in Anniston, Alabama is of great concern to the group's members, most of whom live downwind from Anniston. C.R.B.I. believes that what goes up must come down, and we are very concerned that the pollutants associated with the Anniston incinerator will affect our health and environment. To think that emissions from an incinerator will stop at the Georgia state line is ludicrous. We want to make sure Georgians are well informed and have adequate opportunity to voice their concerns. It's the way America is supposed to work.
C.R.B.I. volunteers have formed a sub-committee to concentrate on educating Georgians downwind from Anniston's proposed incinerator. Meeting once every two weeks, the committee is concentrating on strategies to get the word out to Georgians via direct mail, e-mail, and newspaper editorials. In a letter to Georgia Congressmen, C.R.B.I. member John Huber wrote, "We are writing as Georgia voters to express our deep concern about the chemical weapons incineration project in Anniston, Alabama. We feel that because Anniston is so close to the Georgia border, and because the prevailing weather patterns tend to move air eastward from Anniston directly over Georgia, that any such incinerator is as much a Georgia issue as it is an issue for Anniston and Alabama....We intend to spread this information to Georgians during this election year. We do this in hopes of raising awareness and developing a voice for Georgia in this crucial issue. We need your leadership in Congress to ensure that Alabama is not allowed to make a unilateral decision that will negatively impact the lives of so many Georgians."
Our natural resources do not pay attention to political or jurisdictional boundaries, neither do the efforts of the citizens trying to protect them. C.R.B.I. will soon be filing an appeal to the Alabama Circuit Court in an attempt to halt the Anniston incineration project. It is our hope that the safer, non-incineration technologies currently being tested will replace the incineration technology. For more information on what Georgians can do to stop the Anniston chemical weapons incinerator, contact the Coosa River Basin Initiative at (706) 235-0131, or by email at crbi@roman.net.
Earl's illness brought lessons on friendship and compassion
I met Evelyn Yates and her son Earl for the first time in 1994, when a group of Chemical Weapons Working Group allies from Pine Bluff, Arkansas came to Anniston, Alabama to help us with a march for safe disposal of chemical weapons. At that time, Earl was ten years old. I'm not sure why, but we quickly developed a strong bond. Although I stayed in touch with Evelyn, several years had passed since I last saw Earl. Evelyn insisted that one day Earl would visit again to, "hang out with his bud." Evelyn's involvement in the chemical weapons issue brought her to a June 1998 ACWA meeting held in Anniston. She thought this meeting was a good opportunity for Earl, now 14, to visit.
When Evelyn and Earl finally arrived in Anniston, Evelyn called and informed me that Earl was not feeling well. She said he had had a headache for a couple of days and that he was going to rest before coming up to Jacksonville, where my wife and I live. Since he could not keep any food down and he was dizzy, I decided to go and look in on him. I have been working with HIV and AIDS patients for the past three years and have witnessed the most horrendous illnesses, and remembered back to a similar situation with one of our patients with a meningitis. Earl's conditioin led me to believe he might have meningitis or a severe swelling around the menenges. I told Evelyn that if Earl did not get better by the morning, she should take him to the hospital.
I later realized I had learned my most valuable medical lesson from this experience: the importance of remaining objective. While I had made the correct diagnosis for Earl, because of my emotional involvment with him, I did not act as quickly as I should have. I do not mean that remaining objective is to become an uncaring medical automaton, I mean that when the diagnosis is as bad as it seems, emotion should not cloud good judgement.
On Monday I brought Earl into the clinic where I work. Dr. Hanna thought that Earl might have viral, or aseptic, meningitis. A "lumbar puncture" measuring spinal fluid pressure was around four times that of a normal person. Earl began to deteriorate rapidly. He began to say inappropriate things and comment on people who were not in the room. He could not gain sufficient control of his extremities, nor could he walk without help. This downward slide occurred in a matter of a couple of hours. A CT scan showed a swelling in the subdural frontal right portion of Earl's brain. The swelling was caused by a chronic sinus infection. Earl was rushed to surgery to relieve the pressure and clean out the infection. After the initial surgery, Earl suffered a stroke, resulting in the loss of movement in his left side. For weeks, Earl's cranial pressures fluctuated, and his survival was questionable.
Throughout the ordeal, something very wonderful happened. From the first days, a community of strangers developed and pulled together to help a person in need. People who did not know each other, people of different races and religious backgrounds, began to act as sisters and brothers. The CWWG coalition, ACWA participants from the EPA, state agencies and technology vendors, and many others from across the country who knew Evelyn were updated daily on Earl's health via email. In return, phone, fax and email messages from concerned friends poured in. Thinking back, I don't believe I have ever witnessed such an outpouring of love and kindness. With our focus on Earl, we had precious little time to thank the people who helped spiritually and by being there for Evelyn.
Then, Earl began to recover. He was airlifted from Anniston to a children's hospital in Little Rock, Arkansas where his recovery would be coupled with the long hours of physical therapy. Now home in Pine Bluff, Earl is catching up on sleep, eating well, and should be ready to begin school again in the fall. Evidence of the stroke can still be seen in a weakened left side, and a shortened attention span. Evelyn is also home, helping her son to heal. We are all celebrating Earl's recovery! For me, this experience has shown how valuable our friendships are, and how important it is to support friends in need. This is another lesson we should try to remember and hang on to.
In the few days after Earl regained consciousness, Evelyn had reported that he would spontaneouslyl burst into laughter. Thinking that this was evidence of some brain damage, Evelyn asked him why he was laughing so much. Earl's response was, "Mama, I'm just happy to be alive."
Chemical weapons: disposal or dispersal?
In the 1970s, the Army conducted extensive tests on neutralization of chemical agent stored at the Rocky Mountain Arsenal in Colorado. At that time, neutralization was thought to be a potential disposal solution to the country's stockpile of nerve and mustard agents. However, the Army says that plans were scrapped because the neutralization process created a large amount of hazardous waste. Incineration, by comparison, was thought to produce much less waste, and therefore be a more efficient disposal method.
Over the years, however, millions of pounds of waste have been generated from the JACADS incinerator in the Pacific and the TOCDF incinerator in Utah -- over 45 million from TOCDF alone after just a year and a half of operations. This translates into 15 pounds of waste generated for every pound of chemical agent destroyed. The waste, including decontamination solutions, contaminated brine, ash and dunnage is being transported all across the country (see map below) to be burned, landfilled, or otherwise disposed of. The incineration process has resulted not in the complete disposal of chemical weapons, but the dispersalof process wastes.
Many of these facilities, such as those in southern California, have been polluting nearby communities with other toxic emissions for years. Jane Williams, Director of California Communities Against Toxics, said "Chemical weapons incinerators were supposed to solve the problems of chemical weapons disposal, instead they have created entirely new waste streams that are being dumped in communities of color all across America. This is unconscionable!"
Laws of nature show that you can't make something into nothing. But the solutions to our country's military and industrial waste problems are to invest in clean, contained technologies which destroy toxic materials as completely as possible. If you would like additional information on off-site waste shipments, or if you have information to share about the waste recipients, please contact the CWWG at (606) 986-0868.
 CWWG Home Page |
Contact us: |