Hazardous Waste Litigation Reporter
Volume 23, Issue 16
Published 3/23/2003

NEPA:
Chemical Weapons Working Group v. U.S. Dept. of Defense
Andrews Number 13.4.16.8

Lawsuit Seeks to Halt Chemical Weapons Burning in Four States

Two dozen organizations, ranging from the Vietnam Veterans of America Foundation to the Citizens for Environmental Justice, have filed suit against the federal government to halt the burning of the nation's stockpile of chemical weapons, including Sarin and VX nerve gas, in their communities. Chemical Weapons Working Group et al. v. U.S. Department of Defense et al., No. 1:03CV00645, complaint filed (D.D.C., 3/11/2003)

The suit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, claims there are thousands of tons of chemical warfare agent munitions presently stored in eight communities within the continental United States. In four communities, Anniston, Ala.; Pine Bluff, Ark.; Umatilla, Ore.; and Tooele, Utah, the U.S. Department of Defense and the U.S. Army plan to dispose of the nerve and blister agents contained in various types of munitions and containers by incineration.

The complaint claims that the incineration of these chemical weapons will result in the uncontrolled release of many tons of hazardous air pollutants, including dioxins, polychlorinated biphenyls, lead, mercury, arsenic and other dangerous substances.

On the other hand, the lawsuit claims, in Pueblo, Colo.; Newport, Ind.; Richmond, Ky.; and Aberdeen, Md., the defendants have decided to dispose of thousands of tons of chemical agents through the use of non-incineration process that will result in significantly lower amounts of uncontrolled emissions of hazardous air pollutants.

The lawsuit asserts the Army "failed to adequately assess and compare the impacts from the incineration of chemical weapons with non-incineration alternatives" and "failed to update their assessments of the impacts expected from the baseline incineration program, including the impact on workers."

The plaintiffs seek to ban any additional spending on incinerator construction or operation until the Army complies with the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act to review and update its agent destruction plans.

The complaint charges that the failed performance of prototype incinerators in the Pacific Ocean and Utah was never incorporated into ongoing environmental plans as legally required. The complaint alleges that reports from other federal agencies indicate the incinerators discharged live nerve agent releases into the environment and exposed facility workers to the chemical agents.

In addition, the emissions from the two facilities contained significantly greater quantities of toxic compounds than contemplated in the Army's original environmental planning documents.

One of the plaintiffs suing the federal government is Pine Bluff for Safe Disposal in Arkansas. Its leader, Evelyn Yates, said that all communities deserve "maximum protection" as directed by Congress and required by federal law.

"If some communities are being afforded safer destruction methods, why not here in Arkansas and at the other sites," Yates said.

The plaintiffs are represented by Mick Harrison of Berea, Ky., and Richard Condit of Washington, D.C.