for more information contact:
Elizabeth Crowe 859-986-0868
Craig Williams 859-986-7565
for immediate release Monday, June 10
After a year-long review of destruction technologies, the nine-member Kentucky Citizen's Advisory Commission (CAC) has voted unanimously (7-0) in favor of the use of non-incineration methods to dispose of the nerve and mustard agents stored at the Blue Grass Army Depot (BGAD) in Madison County. The two state employees on the Commission abstained from voting as has been the policy at all other storage sites.
At their June meeting tonight the Governor-appointed CAC made their decision based on:
* the "significant advantages" over incineration
of proven alternative technologies; and
* that "Kentuckians overwhelmingly support an alternative
to incineration."
Among the advantages that the CAC found to advanced technologies
compared with incineration are:
* low-temperature, low-pressure agent destruction;
* agent is controlled during destruction process;
* low amount of toxic emissions;
* process meets criteria approved by local citizens; and,
* the finding by the National Academy of Sciences and the Pentagon
that the alternatives can effectively and safely destroy all the
materials contained in the Kentucky stockpile.
The CAC's resolution reads as follows:
"The Kentucky Citizen's Advisory Commission (CAC) has completed a year-long review of technology options for disposal of Kentucky's chemical weapons stockpile. We believe we have found significant advantages to the technologies demonstrated by the Assembled Chemical Weapons Assessment (ACWA) program. In addition, we believe that nine years of input from the public to the CAC makes clear that Kentuckians overwhelmingly support an alternative to incineration. Therefore, we recommend the deployment of one of the demonstrated ACWA technologies for disposal of Kentucky's chemical weapons stockpile."
Elizabeth Crowe, of the Berea-based Chemical Weapons Working Group, applauded the CAC decision as one that "takes into consideration the wishes of the local community and the best interests of both residents and the environment." She also commented, "The Commission obviously made the best decision for everyone concerned. The advanced non-incineration technologies have been proven to be viable for all the agents and weapons stored here. They are safer than incineration and according to the latest Pentagon data, will get the job done faster."
Dr. Robert Miller, a retired EKU professor and CAC member said at the meeting that, "The only reason I have felt incineration should be kept on the table was that it seemed like it could get the job done faster. But having reviewed the data and been made aware of the time it would take to incinerate the weapons I have learned this is not the case. With that issue now understood I feel incineration would not be in the best interest of this community."
"Incineration has also had a dismal and unsafe performance record," said Peter Hille, a member of Common Ground, a local anti-incineration group. "There have been over a dozen documented releases of chemical agent directly into the environment and other technical problems too numerous to mention. Incineration has been tried and it has failed, it's time to move beyond this unsafe approach."
On May 31, the Army released its Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) which contains information on the technologies being considered for Kentucky--incineration and three non-incineration alternatives. The 45-day public comment period on the EIS will end July 15 with a public input meeting scheduled for Thursday, July 11 at the Stratton Building on the EKU Campus.
Crowe commented about this process, "The CAC's vote is timely. Their decision will be part of the public record and should positively impact the Army's decision which will be made sometime this fall."
 CWWG Home Page |
Contact us: |