|
Nobody wants nerve agent particles in the air. But when standards call for detecting some agents at parts per trillion levels, you need sensitive equipment. “If you can imagine (measuring) 6 inches on a voyage to the sun, that’s the magnitude of what we’re looking at,” said Jeffrey Kiley, monitoring director for the Army’s Chemical Materials Agency. The agency oversees chemical weapons destruction at five sites around the country, including Anniston. The particles were the main topic of discussion at a National Academy of Sciences forum Tuesday morning. A NAS report last August said the Army’s monitoring systems were up to the task of sorting particles from the air and providing adequate protection to workers, communities and the environment. But the report suggested that the Army consider incremental changes to cut the number of “false positives” at weapons disposal facilities – alarms that go off when there is no nerve agent in the air. Personnel at weapons disposal facilities are trained to treat every alarm as a real event. But too many false alarms can wear down the effectiveness of the system, said Charles Kolb, president and CEO of air quality research firm Aerodyne Research. Kolb outlined the study’s findings Thursday morning. “The problem is, most of the times the alarm goes off, it’s not agent,” Kolb said. “Once every three years, it might be agent. In that situation, it’s very easy for people to start to ignore the alarm.” The false alarms usually result in processing stoppages that can last for hours while workers determine the source of the alarm, resulting in lost processing time and money. The report said that false positives are more likely to take place when facilities begin destroying new classes of nerve agent. The Anniston Chemical Agent Disposal Facility, currently destroying sarin-filled weapons, will begin processing VX next year. VX is more toxic than sarin and needs to be monitored at sub-parts per billion levels. “VX is the largest molecule that we have to deal with in terms of chemical agents,” Kolb said. “It’s a very sticky molecule, and it’s very difficult to get it from the air into the instrument.” Monitors at chemical weapons facilities continually take in air and make samples in three- to 10-minute intervals. While the devices are designed to track nerve agent in small quantities, substances that are chemically similar to nerve agent – but safer and more numerous – can get into the system, creating false positives. The report suggested the Army continue to make incremental adjustments to its monitoring process, noting the number of false positives at chemical storage and destruction facilities has declined since 1994. It also recommended that the Army consider Chemical Ionization Mass Spectrometry, a sensitive measurement process used in atmospheric science. Kiley, speaking at the meeting, said CMA would take the suggestions into consideration. He doubted that monitors at Anniston and other chemical disposal areas would change significantly in the next several years. The current systems work well, he said, and no other systems currently are available. “If there were upgrades available, we would have to see whether the cost or expense was justified to do that,” he said. “I don’t believe any improvement, other than incremental improvements, will be done to those facilities.” Craig Williams, director of the Chemical Weapons Working Group in Berea, Ky., which has been critical of the Pentagon’s handling of Chemical Weapons disposal, said at the symposium that he wanted to see additional monitoring for construction workers after they begin work on a chemical neutralization facility at the Blue Grass Army Depot next year. “I hope the Army will consider that point,” he said. Williams also asked Kiley about a state-ordered halt to hazardous
waste operations at the Chemical Agent Munitions Disposal System (CAMDS) in
Stockton, Utah, near the Tooele Chemical Agent Disposal Facility. The Salt
Lake Tribune reported Saturday that state inspectors criticized monitoring
at the facility, which analyzes potentially contaminated weapons but does
not process weapons. Inspectors also criticized procedures at the site, saying
“the overall attitude toward hazardous-waste compliance is lax.” |
| |
About Brian Lyman
| |
Brian Lyman covers infrastructure and the cities of Heflin and Lincoln for the Anniston Star. He lives in Anniston. |
| Phone: Fax: E-mail: |
256-235-3544 256-241-1991 blyman@annistonstar.com |
