Citizen Groups Release Report
on Feasibility of Destroying Nation's Store of Mustard Agent Through
Neutralization
CHEMICAL
WEAPONS WORKING GROUP
128 Main
St. Berea KY 40403
859-986-9868
859-986-2695 (F)
www.cwwg.org kefcwwg@cwwg.org
for
more information contact:
Craig Williams - (859) 986-7565
Karyn Jones - (541) 567-6579
Rufus Kinney - (256 435-4743
Evelyn Yates - (870) 535-0976
Vanessa Pierce - (801) 364-5110
for immediate release Thursday August 31, 2006
Craig Williams - (859) 986-7565
Karyn Jones - (541) 567-6579
Rufus Kinney - (256 435-4743
Evelyn Yates - (870) 535-0976
Vanessa Pierce - (801) 364-5110
for immediate release Thursday August 31, 2006
CITIZEN GROUPS RELEASE REPORT ON
FEASIBILITY OF DESTROYING NATION'S STORE OF MUSTARD AGENT THROUGH
NEUTRALIZATION TO AVOID HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS AND MORE
CLOSELY COMPLY WITH INTERNATIONAL TREATY OBLIGATIONS
Report demonstrates that substituting the
safer neutralization process in place of incineration for mustard
disposal, is feasible; Citizens call on Army to thoroughly investigate
implementation.
The Chemical Weapons Working Group (CWWG) today released a report entitled "Incinerator Retrofit/Stand-Alone Neutralization Feasibility Assessment," which they claim obligates the Army to perform a thorough review of implementing neutralization rather than incineration for the disposal of the nation's stockpile of mustard agent.
Over 12,000 tons of mustard agents, some highly mercury-contaminated, are stored at four facilities where incineration is planned for disposal (Anniston, Alabama; Pine Bluff, Arkansas; Umatilla, Oregon; and Tooele, Utah). At another three sites that store[d] over 4,000 tons of mustard agents, neutralization has been or will be used as the disposal technology (Aberdeen, Maryland; Richmond, Kentucky; and Pueblo, Colorado).
Incineration of these agents, which contain varying, quantities of mercury, poses unnecessary risk to the communities, while safer and more mature alternatives are available. The Army actually has more experience safely neutralizing mustard, than burning the agent: since 1985, 1600 tons of mustard agents have been neutralized compared to 211 tons incinerated.
The report, authored by Mr. Robert Tussey, Jr., a Professional Engineer, concluded that retrofitting existing incinerators with neutralization equipment or erecting stand-alone neutralization facilities adjacent to existing incinerators are both "reasonably feasible." However, Mr. Tussey is careful to point out that specific information, possessed only by the Army, was lacking in preparing the report and thus limited the scope of his assessment.
CWWG Director, Craig Williams emphasized that without all the necessary data, it would be inappropriate to demand that neutralization be deployed at the four incinerators. He said, "The objective of this report is to compel the Army to provide the missing information and determine, with citizen participation, the value of using this safer technology and whether or not such action would be prudent."
Williams pointed out that Congressional Law requires "maximum protection" of the public, workers and the environment during disposal of our nation's chemical weapons. "Knowingly releasing hazardous chemicals into the atmosphere when technologies exist that can significantly reduce or eliminate such pollutants is clearly contrary to what Congress intended," he said.
Questions posed in the report are:
- Would use of one of these options better fulfill U.S. obligations under the international CWC Treaty, which dictates stockpile destruction by 2012?
- Would use of one of these options save taxpayer dollars?
- Would use of one of these options reduce the environmental degradation associated with mustard disposal?
- Would use of one of these options better protect the health of the adjacent communities?
- Would use of one of these options reduce the risks of continued weapons storage?
- Are these options technically
capable of being executed?
Vanessa Pierce, director of HEAL Utah said, "This report presents a compelling case for seriously considering alternatives to incineration. Unfortunately, here in Utah, the Army has refused to look into alternatives or even assess whether neutralization might be safer for the public, and cheaper for taxpayers. All the experts agree that burning mustard is more problematic and health impacting than burning nerve agent. Utahans have already endured more than their fair share of risk during the nerve agent campaigns. It's not too much to ask the Army to look into safer alternatives for destroying mustard agent." (Tooele, Utah stores over 6,000 tons of mustard agent - the largest cache of any site.)
Rufus Kinney, Families Concerned About Nerve Gas Incineration of Anniston, Alabama said, "For reasons of national security the Secretary of Defense and the U.S. Senate (unanimously) have recently called for the completion of destruction of the nation's chemical weapons stockpile in the most timely manner possible without sacrificing the safety of local communities. We thoroughly endorse this view and believe a stand-alone facility to neutralize the mustard munitions while at the same time incinerating the remaining VX, is called for. This could complete destruction by around 2016. Otherwise Anniston could be burning beyond 2020. If for no other reason we shouldn't burn this material knowing that mercury emissions will be drifting onto a community that just can't take any more." (Anniston has been in the national spotlight for years due to its being contaminated with PCBs, mercury, lead, TCE and other toxins.)
A breakdown of the original quantity and the percentage of each site's stockpile made up of mustard agent is as follows:
- Alabama--988 tons: 44% of its original stockpile was mustard, now 54%
- Arkansas--3,219 tons: 81% of its original stockpile was mustard, now 87%
- Oregon--2,340 tons: 63% of its original stockpile was mustard, now 79%
- Utah--6,196 tons: 42% of its
original stockpile was mustard, now 100%
Williams added, "The problems associated with burning mustard are many. For example, in addition to mercury contamination, solidification of the agent has made much of it un-drainable and created chemical characterization and analysis issues and processing rate challenges. And incinerating mustard will emit dioxins and other toxic chemicals on a daily basis. Stricter emissions standards currently being considered by the EPA for incinerators could, in themselves, shut these burners down. Now is the time to consider options to avoid the impacts associated with any and all of these hurdles."
--30--
Copies
of the report are available from the CWWG office upon request.
|
Contact us:
|
