Defense Environment Alert

an exclusive biweekly report on defense policies for cleanup, compliance and pollution prevention

Vol. 15, No. 1

January 9, 2007

DUPONT PULLS OUT OF CONTROVERSIAL PLAN TO TREAT NERVE AGENT WASTE

DuPont announced Jan. 5 that it has pulled out of a long-time, controversial plan to treat nerve agent waste from the Army's Newport, IN, facility at a plant in Deepwater, NJ, where it then planned to subsequently dispose of the treated waste in the Delaware River. The decision comes on the heels of a lawsuit filed by environmental groups that sought to halt the Army's transport and treatment plan for the agent waste.

It also comes as the Government Accountability Office (GAO), in response to a congressional mandate, is expected to soon release a cost-benefit analysis of the Army's off-site treatment plan.

DuPont's action marks a second failed effort by the Army to find an off-site facility to dispose of secondary waste resulting from the neutralization of the VX nerve agent stockpile that resides at the Army's Newport plant. In a Jan. 5 statement on the decision, the Army's Chemical Materials Agency (CMA) says it is "disappointed" but will "return to reviewing all options available to address this ongoing issue." These options include both on- and off-site treatment of the neutralized waste. CMA says the Newport facility has adequate storage capacity to house all of the caustic. wastewater that will result from the neutralization operations there. So far, the facility has neutralized about 36 percent of the plant's original stockpile, it says.

The Army is treating VX agent at its Newport facility and was planning to send about 4 million gallons of neutralized wastewater, known as hydrolysate, to DuPont's Chamber Works facility in New Jersey for secondary treatment and final disposal in the Delaware River. But activists, New Jersey politicians and others have long opposed the plan, arguing it should be addressed on-site rather than shipped off-site for further treatment. Activists have alleged off-site treatment raises chemical security, environmental and worker safety risks.

In a Jan. 5 press release, DuPont says while it met the project's technical requirements, including those related to safety and protecting public health and the environment, it decided to bow out, alluding to the likely difficult time it would have getting the project approved.

"DuPont has a successful history of working with New Jersey regulators and communities, and we value those relationships," the company says in the statement. "However, during our three-year evaluation of the Newport proposal, it has become increasingly clear to us that the approval process will be lengthy and arduous, even with the supportive conclusions reached by the Centers for Disease Control and [EPA] in their independent reviews. Therefore, we believe it is in the best interests of New Jersey and DuPont not to proceed."

Rep. Rob Andrews (D-NJ), a long-time opponent of the off-site treatment plan, hailed DuPont's decision as a "real victory" for South Jersey residents and "the health of 'he Delaware River," according to a statement his office released. He pledged to work with the Army and members of the House Armed Services Committee to ensure all the country's chemical weapons are disposed of in "a timely and responsible manner."

DuPont's decision comes not long after a coalition of environmental groups led by the Delaware Riverkeeper Network filed a lawsuit against the Army alleging violations of various environmental and defense laws and asking a federal district court to suspend the Army's transport-and-treatment plan (Defense Environment Alert, Dec. 26, 2006, p8).

The citizens' coalition Chemical Weapons Working Group (CWWG) welcomed the news of DuPont's decision in a Jan. 5 statement. "The CWWG has always felt that burdening some other community with the risks of hydrolysate disposal was wrong," CWWG Director Craig Williams said.

In related news, the Army is removing Michael Parker as head of CMA - which oversees most of the
chemical weapons destruction plants - so that he can focus strictly on running the Assembled Chemical Weapons Alternatives (ACWA) program, a DOD program separate from CMA that was formed by Congress in response to public opposition to the Army's plan to destroy by incineration all of its stockpiles of chemical weapons. ACWA is using non-incineration methods to destroy the stockpiled weapons at two of the Army's sites.

Parker, who has won accolades from citizens during the many years he has headed up the ACWA program, was given a second job of heading CMA in February 2003 as part of an Army reorganizing effort that consolidated oversight of chemical weapons storage and demilitarization (Defense Environment Alert, Feb. 25, 2003, p5 ).