Chemical Weapons Working Group
P.O. Box 467; Berea, KY 40403
606-986-7565 or 606-986-0868
for further information:
Ross Vincent (719) 561-3117
Craig Williams (606) 986-7565
for immediate release, Wednesday July 30, 1998
PENTAGON SELECTS THREE TECHNOLOGIES TO MOVE TO
DEMONSTRATION IN SEARCH FOR ALTERNATIVES TO INCINERATION
Additional technologies unable to demonstrate immediately due to suspect claims of
sudden money shortage!
The Alternative Chemical Weapons Assessment Program (ACWA) announced today that three technologies will move forward into the demonstration phase the program to identify alternative approaches to incineration for the disposal of the United States' stockpile of assembled chemical weapons.
The three technologies that were awarded contracts to demonstrate are General Atomics (Supercritical Water Oxidation), Burns and Roe (Plasma Arc) and Parsons-Allied Signal (Neutralization/Bio-Treatment). Demonstrations will begin shortly at Dugway Proving Grounds and the Tooele Army Depot in Utah and at Aberdeen Proving Grounds in Maryland.
Under the law which created ACWA, a minimum of two alternative disposal methods must be demonstrated. However, more than the three alternative approaches contracted today have a high probability of being successfully demonstrated. In spite of their having met all the technical criteria, additional options were temporarily eliminated based on the Army's stated lack of available funds to take all qualified approaches to demonstration.
"We appear to be victims of our own success coupled with a sudden lack of funds," said Craig Williams, ACWA Dialogue member and National Spokesperson for the Chemical Weapons Working Group (CWWG), a coalition of citizens groups opposed to incineration. Speaking on behalf of the CWWG, Williams said, "Congress appropriated $40 Million almost two years ago for this effort with the private sector contributing millions of their own money to get to this point. It is unfortunate that the Army has now refused to ante up the funds, approximately $20 million of a $16 Billion budget, necessary to ensure the legitimate completion of this innovative process."
The ACWA Program has been seen by many as the cutting edge in government/citizen interaction on decision-making as it brought Defense Department, Army, EPA, state and tribal regulators together with citizens and environmental groups to work towards a common solution to this disposal problem.
"In a program whose overall budget is projected to be around $16 Billion, I believe insiders are actively trying to limit its (ACWA's) potential success using an imaginary cash flow problem," said Williams. "This could pull the rug out from under the best opportunity to move forward to fulfill the United States' obligations under the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC) and threatens the good will created by the past two years of cooperation." The CWC requires the U.S. to dispose of all its chemical weapons by April 2007, with a one time five year extension if necessary, to destroy the entire chemical weapons stockpile.
ACWA Dialogue member, Ross Vincent, speaking on behalf of the Sierra Club said, "Either the United States is interested in alternative technologies or they're not. If the Army and the Pentagon were truly interested, they would find the necessary funds to support ACWA. If they're not the entire mission could be stalled indefinitely. If this happens, the responsibility will fall squarely at the feet of the Army's Chemical Demilitarization Office."
Incineration advocates inside the Army along with a few ACWA Dialogue incineration supporters have tried to convince Congress and the Pentagon not to move any funds to support ACWA, claiming it would cripple the overall disposal program. But others contend this is a bogus claim if viewed from the program's inability to execute its incineration program anywhere near their projected schedule. "Instead of supporting the options showing the most promise, the Army has again chosen to defend their decision to continue incineration no matter what. ACWA was, and still is, the best a chance to end the 15 years of controversy surrounding technology selection, but the Army's Chemical Demilitarization Office never misses an opportunity to miss an opportunity." Williams said. "They keep dumping millions into public relations to sell incineration while supposedly lacking the funds to demonstrate alternatives. This certainly fails the 'smell test.' Meanwhile, the ACWA Managers Office has made every effort to secure the necessary funding to demonstrate all appropriate alternatives," said Williams.
Program Manager for ACWA, Mike Parker, in the press release announcing the awards, emphasized additional task orders (contracts), for the demonstration phase, may be awarded pending the availability of additional FY '98 and/or FY '99 funds.
"We will continue to seek the funds necessary for fulfillment of the ACWA mission and ensure this process is deemed legitimate at the end of the day," said Williams. "If quality technologies are not given the opportunity to move forward based on suspicious claims of sudden financial problems, the question that created ACWA, 'What is the safest method to destroy these weapons? ' will never be answered. We could be right back where we were three years ago. That would be unfortunate and could be avoided if the rhetoric from the Army and the Administration of supporting safe and environmentally sound alternatives is lived up to," Williams concluded.
-30-
 CWWG Home Page |
Contact us: |