Published: Apr 18, 2004 - 09:35:55 pm EDT

VX waste plan likely to pass; Governors express their concern

By Hilary Corrigan, Delaware State News

DOVER - The deadline for public comment on an Army proposal for the DuPont Co. to treat the byproduct of a deadly nerve agent and discharge the effluent into the Delaware River closes today.

Col. Jesse Barber, the Army's project manager for alternative technologies and approaches, who has been promoting the plan, remains confident in the effort to get the caustic wastewater of nerve agent VX treated at DuPont's Chambers Works facility in Deepwater, N.J., at the foot of the Delaware Memorial Bridge.

The Army will address the submitted concerns and believes "that the project will be given a green light," Col. Barber said.

Army chemical and legal officials will review the comments and no independent review of them would be required, he said.

"I don't like to speculate on how long" that process will take, Col. Barber said.

The Army is waiting for an assessment of its plan by the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

"It is not unusual," Col. Barber said, for that agency to review an Army proposal.

No decisions will be made until that review is complete, said Army spokesman Jeff Lindblad.

Transporting the caustic wastewater likely wouldn't begin for three to four months after awarding a contract, Mr. Lindblad said.

While there is no time schedule set on the proposed DuPont treatment process, Col. Barber said he hopes to start the initial destruction of the nerve agent at its Indiana site toward the end of the summer.



The byproduct of that process is what the Army hopes to contract DuPont to treat.

That contract has some opposition. A recent resolution objecting to the plan passed the Delaware House of Representatives and Senate.

Last week, New Jersey Gov. James McGreevey and Delaware Gov. Ruth Ann Minner sent a joint letter to the Pentagon objecting to the project.

The letter states that DuPont's study of the proposal shows "an inappropriate method of handling" the acids involved and notes "little, if any" published information on the environmental effects the materials would have on the waterway.

It goes on to question the "safety and wisdom of transporting this material" from its Indiana stockpiling site and states that the Army "has failed" to show that levels of the nerve agent in the discharged material would be below detection limits.

It also states that it's in the best interest of Delaware and New Jersey for the material to be treated closer to its Indiana depot.

"I read the New Jersey and Delaware governors' letter a little bit differently than most people," Col. Barber said.

"They didn't come flat out and say, 'No, we won't do it.'"

Delaware's Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control did not send its technical review to the Army after reviewing the proposal, said Kevin Donnelly, director of DNREC's Division of Water Resources.

"There's no need to," Mr. Donnelly said. "The state's comments are the governor's comments."

The DuPont plant needs an updated state permit from New Jersey to discharge material but not from Delaware, Mr. Donnelly said. But that updated permit could include conditions that Delaware can contribute to. And if New Jersey grants a permit allowing the project, Delaware could appeal to the Garden State and then to the federal Environmental Protection Agency, Mr. Donnelly said.

DuPont spokesman Anthony Farina said, "the project falls within our existing operating permit."

But DuPont would need to acquire a construction permit from New Jersey to build tanks to hold the material.

The company needs no permits from Delaware, said Mr. Farina, who added that he hasn't read the resolution or the governors' letter.

The weight of that resolution and letter "is for the Army to decide," Mr. Donnelly said.

Staff writer Hilary Corrigan can be reached at 422-1200.