CWWG: Opponents Unpack Legal Challenge on Courthouse Steps

OPPONENTS OF VX WASTE SHIPMENTS UNPACK BASIS FOR LEGAL CHALLENGE ON FEDERAL COURTHOUSE STEPS
Citizens Groups and National Organizations Cite Safety & Environmental Concerns Along with
Federal Law Violations and Accuse Army Leaders of Lying to Communities

INDIANAPOLIS - Today, national organizations and expert witnesses joined representatives of communities just before entering the federal courthouse in Indianapolis where they will try to stop the Army from continuing shipments of nerve agent by-products from Indiana to Texas.

In a series of brief presentations, the speakers identified multiple violations of federal and state environmental and safety regulations as well as accusing the Army of intentionally lying to communities and signing secret contracts in order to avoid public involvement in their decisions.

Sara Morgan of Montezuma, IN, near the Newport Chemical Depot where VX nerve agent is being neutralized said, "In general the Army's interaction with citizens throughout the whole program has been characterized by deception, half-truths, and outright lies." Morgan cited instances where senior Army officials have intentionally misrepresented the status of the program. "As a retired elementary teacher, I know some basic math," she said. "So far what the Army has told us just doesn't add up. It seems with them - two plus two equals five or nine or whatever suits their purpose. So we're here today to correct their math, get to the bottom of it and set the record straight."

The controversy stems from the Army's decision to ship VX agent by-product, called hydrolysate (VXH) off site for final treatment, rather than treat it on site in Newport. Originally, the Army, the community and the State of Indiana had agreed to treat the material on site. However, the Army, claiming cost savings, unilaterally abandoned this approach and decided to ship it to a commercial facility for disposal. First they tried Dayton, Ohio, but citizens and elected officials balked. New Jersey was the next target, but the opposition there was even fiercer - turning back the Army once again.

In both cases, the Army notified the targeted communities of their intentions. Having been foiled twice by public outcry, they decided on a new tactic: find a disposal facility and secretly sign a contract and begin shipments before announcing it the public - and that's just what they did. Port Arthur, Texas and an incinerator operated by Veolia Environmental Services became the reception site for the VXH, which the Army claims is nothing but caustic wastewater. "There is no VX in this waste," claims the Army, repeatedly, but opinions differ.

Dr. Michael Sommer, a forensic environmental chemist from Houston stated, "The proposed analytical test methods the Army developed to assure complete neutralization of the VX are wholly inadequate to ensure protection of public health and the environment."

In addition, there are serious issues regarding the safety of transporting this material over 1,000 miles, rather than treating it where it is. Dr. Fred Millar, a Hazardous Materials Transportation Safety and Security Expert from Arlington, Virginia stated, "The release and dispersion from a truck containing material including residual quantity of VX, whether by accident or terrorism, could potentially cause many deaths and injuries and cause terror and economic implications."

Furthermore, while all chemical weapons incinerators operated by the Army have specific monitoring devices to detect this most dangerous material, the Veolia incinerator has no such capability. In fact, they are not even analyzing what is being unloaded at their facility, nor are they conducting any trial burns.

According to Dr. Neil Carman, an Air Quality Expert, Austin, Texas and former regulatory official with the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, "The burning of close to two million gallons of VX-containing liquid in the Veolia incinerator has a potential to result in the stack gas release of unburned VX nerve agent into the atmosphere of Port Arthur."

The complaint filed by citizens groups, along with the Sierra Club and the Chemical Weapons Working Group also accuses the Army of violating federal Environmental Justice policies in violation of the National Environmental Policy Act.

Elizabeth Crowe of the Chemical Weapons Working Group stated, "The inescapable truth is that shipping this material to the Port Arthur community is exactly what the principles of Environmental Justice and the President's Executive Order were meant to prevent. Yet, our own government, our own military, sworn to protect all Americans, is consciously violating these principles. It is impossible to see this otherwise."

The residents of the Port Arthur community living nearest the incinerator are predominantly African-American living well below the national poverty level. Hilton Kelley, director and founder of Port Arthur's Communities In-Power Development Association was recently quoted in a press release stating, "It is a sad state of affairs that, after trying to send this poison to two communities up north and getting rejected, the Army has targeted a poor southern minority community. I assume they thought we wouldn't have the capacity to resist - they were wrong."

Of today's hearing in federal court, Craig Williams, director of the Chemical Weapons Working Group had this to say, "For the past five years we have tried to reason with the Army decision makers. We have proposed solutions to avoid litigation, beginning as far back as 2002. But each time we try and work with them they refuse - even after five years of controversy and public rejection of their plan, they persist. They have left us no choice but to bring this to a judge and hope that the courts will force the Army to recognize that cooperation is better than confrontation. After all, we're not the enemy, and this is not the way to treat the citizens in this country."

The Preliminary Injunction Hearing, in front of Chief District Court Judge, Larry J. McKinney will begin today and is expected to take three days. It is being held in the United States District Court, Southern District of Indiana, in Indianapolis.

--30-
a copy of the Complaint can be seen at: <http://cwwg.org/Complaint05.08.07.pdf>