Richmond Register
February 6, 2002

Local delegation to look at alternatives to incineration

by LUKE BRADSHAW
Register News Writer

There is no question the chemical weapons stored at the Blue Grass Army Depot will be destroyed. It's just a matter of when and how.

Over the course of the past few years, alternatives to incineration have developed into a reality. For years, incineration appeared to be the chosen option to dispose of nerve and blister agents stored at the various facilities across the U.S.

Today, several Madison County officials and members of the Citizen's Advisory Commission will tour the Assembled Chemical Weapon Assessment Program at the Aberdeen Chemical Agent Disposal Facility in Maryland. The trip had been postponed initially due to the events that took place on Sept. 11.

"It might clear up some of the mystery about the alternatives to incineration," BGAD Public Affairs Officer Dave Easter said about the trip. "It sometimes helps to visualize the process instead of reading about it. There will be briefings on all aspects of the process."

Easter said the alternative technologies are being looked at here as well as at the Pueblo Chemical Agent Disposal Facility in Colorado. "We will have a chance to see their operations first-hand," Richmond City Commissioner Bill Strong said. "I am very excited for the opportunity to return with a lot of information and then to give our view of it to the public."

In 1996, the Congress and the President, responding to public concerns about the safe destruction of chemical weapons, established and later expanded the ACWA program. Through ACWA, the U.S. Department of Defense was charged with identifying and demonstrating two or more technologies to incineration.

Three alternative options were outlined by ACWA in May of 1999. One approach proposed by General Atomics to a total destruction of all assembled chemical weapons was through either reverse assembly for the rockets or reverse assembly plus cyrofracture for projectiles.

Cryofracture is a process developed by General Atomics for the Army in which munitions are embrittled by cooling in liquid nitrogen and then fractured to access agents and energetics. General Atomics proposed to neutralize the agents and energetics separately.

The other technologies were presented by Burns and Roe, which involved cutting with a plasma arc, and Parsons/Honeywell. That process uses modified reverse assembly for the chemical access. The modifications to reverse assembly include a high-pressure water jet to cut the munitions and a high-pressure wash to remove the agents and enegetics.

There is an aspect to the Parsons/Honeywell process that is a little different than the proposal, but remains intrinsically the same. Craig Williams, director of Berea-based Chemical Weapons Working Group, said instead of building an on-site bioreactor, they are opting to neutralize the munitions there and ship it to a commercial bioreactor in New Jersey.

"Incineration emits toxins that are harmful as part of the process," Williams said. "It has a history of releasing live agent itself. In neutralization, there is no emission because it has the capability to control the material. It also has the capability so you can analyze the material before moving onto the next step."

Elizabeth Crowe, director of organization and communications with the Kentucky Environmental Foundation, said that technology tours offer people in the community an opportunity to get information directly from those who are applying the technology.

"There is a distinct advantage when you get to ask questions to the technicians," Crowe said. "The difference (between incineration and the alternatives) is the concept. The alternatives to incineration are to control the output of the process. I'm pleased that some of the citizens in Madison County will get to see the process with their own eyes."

According to Crowe, the reason the site at Maryland is of great importance is three-fold. It's the oldest and largest chemical testing and production facility in the U.S. The second reason is that ACADF is so important in the grand scheme of things is that it serves as the home to the offices of the chemical weapon disposal program. The final reason is that it is the site where alternatives to incineration were tested.

"This gives me the opportunity to see it and we may have a new technology to propose that may be cleaner, safer, and more economical when we return," said Amanda Stafford, Citizen's Advisory Commission member. "The mission of CAC is to inform the public so they can better understand the technologies."

Joining Easter, Stafford, Strong and Crowe on the trip to Maryland are CAC co-chairman Doug Hindman, CAC member Diane Kerby, Richmond Commissioner Mike Brewer and Amy Connor, from the Depot's Outreach Office. While in Maryland, the group will tour facilities and attend briefings on the technology behind the alternatives to incineration.

Luke Bradshaw will report on the Maryland tours and briefings involving chemical weapons disposal through Sunday.