Federal Judge Rules in Favor
of Citizens' Motion in NEPA Case on Chem Weapons Incineration
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
Citizen groups from Alabama, Arkansas, Oregon and Utah, where the Army is currently burning chemical weapons, won a victory recently when Judge Richard K. Eaton of the US District Court in Washington, DC ruled that new information relevant to the Army's incineration program may be presented to supplement the record before the Court.
The citizen plaintiffs state that in 1988 the Army's Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) failed to adequately consider alternatives, as the document contained only one paragraph - out of three volumes - devoted to alternatives to incineration. Moreover, since then there have been numerous releases of nerve agent out the stacks of the incinerators and four of the original eight US weapons storage sites have switched from incineration to a safer neutralization process. The "burn sites" have also seen repeated technical problems, environmental violations and mechanical breakdowns.
"None of this information was available when the Army made its decision to use incineration in 1988," said Craig Williams, Director of the Kentucky-based Chemical Weapons Working Group.
NEPA requires that Government Agencies prepare a Supplemental EIS if, "There are significant new circumstances or information relevant to environmental concerns. . ."
The citizens' complaint includes numerous examples of significant new information that has never been reviewed under the NEPA requirements, thus charging that the Army failed to take certain required actions
Judge Eaton agreed, ruling "there is no rule barring supplementation of the record because the complained of decision is a failure to take action."
The citizen groups claim the Army is required to produce a Supplemental EIS that considers, among other things:
Richard Condit, lead attorney for the citizens groups said, "We believe the evidence now permitted to be before the Court will demonstrate that the Army has been negligent in fulfilling their duties under the NEPA statutes and that incineration currently underway at the four communities should be halted until a new EIS is completed."
The case is scheduled to he heard later this year.
Craig Williams (859) 986-7565
for
immediate release: Wednesday, November 1, 2006
FEDERAL JUDGE RULES IN FAVOR OF CITIZENS'
MOTION IN NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT (NEPA) CASE ON CHEMICAL
WEAPONS INCINERATION
Ruling
Allows New Information - Since The Army's 1988 Environmental Impact
Statement - To Be Presented in the DC Court
Citizen groups from Alabama, Arkansas, Oregon and Utah, where the Army is currently burning chemical weapons, won a victory recently when Judge Richard K. Eaton of the US District Court in Washington, DC ruled that new information relevant to the Army's incineration program may be presented to supplement the record before the Court.
The citizen plaintiffs state that in 1988 the Army's Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) failed to adequately consider alternatives, as the document contained only one paragraph - out of three volumes - devoted to alternatives to incineration. Moreover, since then there have been numerous releases of nerve agent out the stacks of the incinerators and four of the original eight US weapons storage sites have switched from incineration to a safer neutralization process. The "burn sites" have also seen repeated technical problems, environmental violations and mechanical breakdowns.
"None of this information was available when the Army made its decision to use incineration in 1988," said Craig Williams, Director of the Kentucky-based Chemical Weapons Working Group.
NEPA requires that Government Agencies prepare a Supplemental EIS if, "There are significant new circumstances or information relevant to environmental concerns. . ."
The citizens' complaint includes numerous examples of significant new information that has never been reviewed under the NEPA requirements, thus charging that the Army failed to take certain required actions
Judge Eaton agreed, ruling "there is no rule barring supplementation of the record because the complained of decision is a failure to take action."
The citizen groups claim the Army is required to produce a Supplemental EIS that considers, among other things:
- Alternatives to incineration for the destruction of these materials, such as those being used at other sites;
- All significant impacts on the environment and public health from incineration;
- Comparative risks of incineration vs. alternative technologies;
- Thousands of modifications to the original incineration design;
- New agent toxicity standards promulgated by EPA and CDC; and
- Unanticipated high levels of
heavy metals in the agents and munitions.
Richard Condit, lead attorney for the citizens groups said, "We believe the evidence now permitted to be before the Court will demonstrate that the Army has been negligent in fulfilling their duties under the NEPA statutes and that incineration currently underway at the four communities should be halted until a new EIS is completed."
The case is scheduled to he heard later this year.
--30--
Copies of Judge Eaton's Order and the Citizens NEPA Complaint are available upon request from the CWWG.
Copies of Judge Eaton's Order and the Citizens NEPA Complaint are available upon request from the CWWG.
|
Contact us:
|
