for more information: Elizabeth Crowe: (859)
986-0868
Craig Williams: (859) 986-7565
for immediate release: Thursday, February 20, 2003
The Chemical Weapons Working Group (CWWG), a U.S. grassroots coalition working for safe disposal of the obsolete stockpile of U.S. chemical weapons, today released a formal statement outlining its support for on-site treatment of chemical weapon wastes, rather than off-site shipment of those wastes to commercial facilities.
In the U.S., chemical weapons are stored in Alabama, Arkansas, Colorado, Indiana, Kentucky, Maryland, Oregon and Utah. For more than a decade the CWWG member groups have worked as a united force to ensure that the chemical weapons stored in their communities are destroyed with the safest non-incineration technology possible, thus protecting workers and the public from chemical agent exposures and toxic contamination. Now the group has formally stated their position that as much of the "secondary" wastes from the chemical weapons destruction process as possible be treated on-site, to limit the burden on other potential reception communities.
The CWWG statement notes in part, "Because it is impossible to truly destroy matter, we acknowledge that the chemical weapons disposal process will result in waste which will unavoidably be landfilled..." yet the Army and its contractors must "ensure that wastes be reduced as far as possible to the lowest quantity, and the lowest toxicity, in order to minimize the impact to public health and the environment."
Referring to the CWWG statement at a meeting of the Indiana Citizens Advisory Commission meeting on Wednesday night, Ms. Sara Morgan of Montazuma, Indiana said there were numerous reasons why secondary wastes -- whether from an incinerator or from a neutralization technology like that which will destroy nerve agents at Newport, Indiana -- should be treated on-site.
"Whether the reason is based in environmental justice, or keeping jobs at the chemical weapons sites, we believe that the waste can best be treated on-site. The Army and its contractors need to consider secondary waste treatment very carefully, and engage the public in reviewing the options before any decisions are made," Morgan said. "At the very least, the Army needs to fully inform communities of the potential for receiving wastes, even if those wastes are relatively benign. If they don't, they may wind up finding opposition around every corner."
The Army has indeed found opposition to its plan to commercially treat VX hydrolysate from Newport, at a PermaFix facility in Dayton, Ohio. A Dayton community group, Land Lovers Against Neighborhood Dumping (LLAND), says the facility is a menace to local residents, and cannot be trusted to manage the waste responsibly. Citizens and elected officials from East St. Louis, Illinois have on several occasions publicly opposed chemical weapons waste shipments to a nearby Onyx incinerator.
Treating wastes from chemical weapons incinerators at off-site commercial facilities can be even more disturbing because that waste, in large quantity and/or high toxicity, is often sent to incinerators or is deep-well injected. The CWWG calls such shipments "unjust, unacceptable and unnecessary." One of the most blatant examples of this injustice, says CWWG Director Craig Williams, is that wastes from the Anniston, Alabama incinerator are slated for shipment to Sauget, Illinois, Port Arthur, Texas, and Emelle, Alabama; communities which have a 90-97% minority population, high poverty rates, and a history of toxic contamination.
"The Army has failed to conduct an assessment of the impact these shipments would have on other communities as per the Principles of Environmental Justice, and to provide any up-to-date, concrete evidence that off-site waste shipments would be protective, efficient or cost effective," said Williams. "We want the Army and its contractors to be more responsible with this waste, and we think other communities will join us in that position."
 CWWG Home Page |
Contact us: |