Congressman:  Shipping VX waste to N.J. needs more review

Associated Press

Thurs, April 27, 2006

INDIANAPOLIS -- A congressman said Wednesday he would ask the General Accounting Office to review an Army report that concludes it would be far cheaper and quicker to dispose of a nerve agent residue in New Jersey rather than treating it onsite in Indiana.

U.S. Rep. Rob Andrews, D-N.J., said the Army's conclusions in a cost-benefit analysis released Tuesday are not supported by the facts and are "so flimsy as to be meaningless."

The Army's report concludes that it could take nearly five years longer -- and cost up to $347 million more -- if a caustic wastewater created by the VX nerve agent's destruction were disposed of in western Indiana, instead of trucked to a DuPont Co. plant in New Jersey.

Andrews said the cost-benefit comparison, which Congress sought last year, does not reveal how Army officials reached those conclusions and also assumes New Jersey regulators would approve a permit to allow DuPont to begin disposing of the wastewater by Sept. 1.

"I frankly think this report smacks of an attitude that says `Ready, fire, aim.' You basically make up your mind as to what you want to say and then organize whatever facts you have to justify that conclusion," he said during a teleconference.

An Army contractor began last May destroying more than 250,000 gallons of VX nerve agent -- a liquid so deadly even a tiny droplet can kill a human -- originally stored at the Newport Chemical Depot about 30 miles north of Terre Haute.

To date, about 17 percent of that VX stockpile has been destroyed in chemical reactors, producing a corrosive wastewater called hydrolysate that's being stored in tanks at Newport.

The Army insists that its plan to truck the liquid waste hundreds of miles to a DuPont plant in Deepwater, N.J., for treatment and final discharge into the Delaware River is safe.

But there is strong opposition in both New Jersey and Delaware from critics who fear traces of VX and other toxic byproducts would reach the Delaware River even after treatment.

Activists in Indiana, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Kentucky also oppose the disposal plans, warning of environmental damage if a truck carrying hydrolysate overturned.

Andrews said he will ask the GAO to conduct an independent analysis of the Army's calculations and will also work with New Jersey Gov. Jon Corzine, New Jersey lawmakers and environmental regulators to thwart the DuPont plan.

He also intends to ask House members of both parties to include language in the House Armed Services authorization bill currently being drafted to delay or block the DuPont disposal plan.

Army spokesman Jeff Lindblad said having DuPont treat the hydrolysate would cost less than $100 million, including the cost of transporting the wastewater.

He said the Army is "confident in the accuracy and validity" of its analysis, but said many details, including the potential cost of DuPont's contract, are not contained in the report because doing so would compromise the contract procurement process.

Lindblad said the Army has offered to show Andrews, and other member of Congress, the detailed documents behind the analysis' conclusions.

Andrews aide Bill Caruso, however, said he was aware of no such offer by the Army.Earlier this month, activists in six states called on the Army to change its plans and dispose of the hydrolysate in Indiana.

They want the Army to destroy Newport's hydrolysate using the original method proposed for the job _ a high-pressure treatment process that would yield a solid that could be buried in landfills.

Craig Williams, director of the Chemical Weapons Working Group in Berea, Ky., said he had not read the Army report, but found its general findings "unfathomable."

"I'm very suspicious and skeptical of this," he said. "I think it's agenda-driven."