VX waste plan inches on, despite misgivings

By DANIEL WALSH Staff Writer, (856) 794-5111

Published: Monday, August 7, 2006

So, what next?

That's the lingering question for the U.S. Army's plan to dispose of VX nerve agent waste at a DuPont plant along the Delaware River.

Despite local public and political opposition, the Army has gotten nearly every scientific approval it needs to go ahead with plans to dispose of the deadly agent's caustic wastewater -- or hydrolysate -- in Deepwater, Salem County. The federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the Environmental Protection Agency have given their consent to the plan, saying it's scientifically sound.

Now, all that's left is an environmental assessment, under the tenets of the National Environmental Policy Act, and a permit modification allowing DuPont to treat the hydrolysate. For that, DuPont must go to the state Department of Environmental Protection, and that approval is by no means guaranteed.

Gov. Jon S. Corzine's predecessors raised concerns about the project, as did Corzine when he was a U.S. senator.

Southern New Jersey's three congressmen oppose the Army's plan, and U.S. Reps. Rob Andrews, D-1st, and Frank LoBiondo, R-2nd, said a week ago that they'd oppose the project no matter what the Army does. U.S. Rep. Jim Saxton, R-3rd, had introduced legislation calling for a General Accounting Office review, ostensibly looking at the full scope of the project and definitely touching on cost comparisons with other methods of disposal.

Andrews estimated the review would be approved this autumn and could last nine to 12 months. If it's not approved, however, the Army and DuPont could move forward much more quickly.

’ÄúIt's kind of strange,’Äù said Jeff Lindblad, a spokesman for the U.S. Army's Chemical Materials Agency. ’ÄúIt seems they're trying to lump this whole thing into the GAO. The GAO looks at accounting.’Äù

The main points of contention by most critics of the plan have been the Army's performance and a distrust of it.

First, they zero in on three spills at the Army's weapons depot in Newport, Ind., where the VX is being destroyed, producing the wastewater byproduct. The Army says it responded to those spills with no major incident.

Second, they point out the Army's initial tests of flammability at 200 degrees proved way off in a June 2005 testing, as flammability proved then to be below 70 degrees. Army scientists found a chemical called diisopropylamine had condensed back into the solution. They added a condenser, and flammability temperatures rose back to previous levels, according to Lindblad.

The distrust runs deeper than with those incidents, however, largely because local residents and congressmen learned of the project only through a public notice in a Salem County newspaper.

Municipal governments in a number of southern New Jersey towns have formally opposed the Army's plan. So have environmental and chemical weapons watchdog groups, as well as a union representing employees at DuPont's plant in Deepwater.

A previous effort to dispose of the VX wastewater in Dayton, Ohio, was opposed by residents and rejected by state and county regulators.

Activists from Indiana to Kentucky and New Jersey have pushed for the Army to dispose of the wastewater on-site in Indiana, using a process called Supercritical Water Oxidation, or SCWO. The Army is set to use SCWO at a weapons depot in Kentucky, but that wastewater won't be as corrosive because it will be a mix of VX hydrolysate and hydrolysates from mustard and GB agents, which are less potent.

A National Research Council report raised concerns about using SCWO in Kentucky but found it could be done if proper precautions are taken. Army tests have found that using SCWO with pure VX hydrolysate corrodes liners in the pressure units too quickly, requiring costly replacements on a far-too-regular basis.

To e-mail Daniel Walsh at The Press: DWalsh@pressofac.com