Defense Environment Alert

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

Vol. 14, No. 16

August 8, 2006

CHEM WEAPONS WASTE PLAN LOSING HILL SUPPORT DESPITE CDC SAFETY FINDING

A recent Centers for Disease Control & Prevention (CDC) report finding the Army's plan to ship Indiana
chemical weapons waste to a private New Jersey facility for treatment poses no human health risks has failed to
stem growing opposition to the plan, which includes New Jersey Gov. Jon Corzine (D) and several members of
Congress, sources say. Relevant documents are available on InsideEPA. com. See page 2 for details.

At issue is the Army's plan to ship treated VX nerve agent waste from its Newport, IN, demilitarization site to
the DuPont Chambers Works facility in Deepwater, NJ, where it would be treated further and released into the
Delaware River. The Newport facility has demilitarized approximately 20 percent of its stockpile, according to a
spokesman for the Chemical Materials Agency (CMA), the body overseeing most Army demilitarization sites, and
the service wants to ship the waste product off-site for secondary treatment. The plan faces significant opposition
from environmental groups and lawmakers, particularly those in states along the proposed transportation route.

The CDC report follows an EPA study in February showing the plan poses no ecological risks, an announce-
ment environmental groups and political opponents downplayed at the time (Defense Environment Alert, March 7,
pl9). The critics are similarly dismissing the CDC results, with several sources saying Corzine and some New
Jersey House members will do all they can to prevent the shipments. The study "doesn't push [the plan] forward,"
says a spokesman for Rep. Robert Andrews (D-NJ), calling it "just another cog in the process." And a spokesman
for Rep. Frank LoBiondo (R-NJ) questions the validity of the data, saying the CDC report "paints the rosiest
possible picture" of the plan's impacts. "At the end of the day, opposition will still be there" no matter what health
and environmental studies are released, the spokesman says.

Andrews successfully added a provision to the fiscal year 2007 defense authorization bill, now undergoing House-Senate conference negotiations, which would block the shipment pending a Government Accountability
Office cost-benefit analysis. LoBiondo supports that measure, with his spokesman saying backers expect it to
survive the conference. Even if that analysis is completed, which could take up to 12 months after passage of the
law, DuPont will have to submit a permit modification proposal to the New Jersey Department of Environmental
Protection laying out the plan's impacts at the treatment site, which would start a regulatory process that sources say
Corzine could drag out.

In the report, CDC notes that if DuPont requests a permit modification, "EPA will act in its oversight role to
ensure that the treated effluent meets the permit limitations set to protect the environment. Additionally, EPA will
make every effort to provide relevant information and to participate, as necessary, while DuPont proceeds." But an
EPA Region 11 spokesperson recently downplayed EPA's role, noting that the agency lacks "any decision-making
authority in this process."

Sources say the state has sole oversight over the permit unless EPA decides to assert national authority.
"There's always a possibility EPA could go over the state's head and issue a permit," a source with the Mid-Atlantic
Environmental Law Center says. The source adds that such action is not often taken but, "You can't rule out the
possibility. I think EPA could claim inherent authority under the Clean Water Act, and the federal government could
push this despite state objections."

The CMA spokesman says having the CDC concur with the plan "is important to us and the states' citizens."
The source adds, "The science here is firm," but acknowledges that the Army has looked at contingency plans such
as full on-site treatment using an environmentalist-preferred method called supercritical water oxidation. The
spokesman says the A-rmy is preparing an environmental assessment, as required by the National Environmental
Policy Act (NEPA), which lays out the shipment plan's potential environmental impacts. No date has been set for
public comment on the document, but, "We're confident [commentators] will agree with us" about the plan's safety.
The spokesman would not speculate on future political obstacles to the plan or whether they can be overcome.

Many sources say the Army plan has little public support and is unlikely to succeed. "If you take the
political temperature, everyone from sportsmen to steel workers to local grassroots people are saying [the plan] has
no benefit," says a source with the Chemical Weapons Working Group (CWWG), a chemical weapons watchdog
that opposes the plan. The source says several environmental groups have discussed possible legal challenges to the
plan based on possible violations of NEPA, and some are considering "involving themselves deeply in the permit-
ting process" at the site.

CWWG has asked the Army for a voluntary 180-day moratorium on the plan, which has not yet gone into
action, until outside observers can comment on the CDC report. "Everyone knows there will be an impact on the
Delaware River," the source says. "The fundamental issue is what about the plan deserves to be embraced by the
river's community, and I haven't found anything."

A source with Global Green USA, which advocates threat reduction and the nonproliferation of weapons
worldwide, concurs with CWWG's political assessment. Opposition "is very deep-seated," especially because "the
DuPont [treatment] processes are sufficiently opaque to most people that they don't know what's finally dumped in
the Delaware." The source points out that the Army previously planned to ship the waste only as far as Dayton, OH,
but that plan was abandoned because local opposition arose. "If shipping to Dayton had been explained well to the