Chorus of officials questioning VX plan grows louder

The proposal to transport and treat the neutralized VX nerve agent wastewater at the DuPont Chambers Works in Deepwater has brought many concerns, even after studies have been conducted on behalf of the U.S. Army and DuPont that claim the process would be safe.

Despite the initial research findings that conclude the wastewater can be transported and treated safely and effectively, local as well as state officials are continuing to step up, state their opinions and request answers to many unanswered questions, as the public comment deadline approaches.

n In January, U.S. Sen. Jon S. Corzine, D-N.J., joined by Sen. Frank R. Lautenberg, D-N.J., and U.S. Rep. Robert Andrews, D-1st Dist., and U.S. Rep. Frank LoBiondo, R-2nd Dist., requested the Army extend the comment period to give the public an extended opportunity to learn about and comment on the disposal plan.

"Our constituents have expressed deep concerns about this proposal and we request that their concerns be given a full hearing,'' the senators and congressmen wrote. "A 30-day comment period will not allow our constituents sufficient time to learn about this complex procedure, which involves one of the deadliest chemicals ever produced.''

n At a meeting held at Corzine's office in Washington, D.C., officials agreed to extend the comment period for another 60 days and hold two open public information meetings in both New Jersey and Delaware.

The meeting brought together Corzine, Lautenberg, Andrews, LoBiondo and New Jersey Gov. James E. McGreevey, or their representatives, together with the Department of the Army Col. Jesse Barber, project manager for U.S. Army Chemical Materials Agency's Alternative Technologies and Approaches Project and DuPont representatives to discuss the request.

The resolution urges the New Jersey Congressional delegation to ban the project in effort to protect and preserve the New Jersey's waterways. The treated VX wastewater would be dumped into the Delaware River from the Chambers Works.

"It is in the best interest of the State of New Jersey to prohibit the discharge of treated nerve agent VX in the Delaware River in order to preserve our resources and environment from pollution and contamination," the resolution reads.

This resolution is pending full approval from the committee at its next meeting sometime in the beginning of May.

n A public information meeting, held on March 17 in New Jersey and March 19 in Delaware, brought residents, local officials, state representatives and environmental groups from both states, who stressed their concerns and asked questions.

Posters and models of the proposed treatment process and facility were at everyone's avail. During a question and answer segment with DuPont Chambers Works Manager John Strait and Barber, residents asked questions concerning the safety of the treatment procedure.

n Later that month, members of the New Jersey and Delaware congressional delegations, with further concerns, asked an outside third party --the National Center for Environmental Health's Center for Disease Control -- to conduct a formal review of the proposal.

A letter was sent stating, "we understand that the CDC provided the Army with informal comments on and questions about DuPont's Toxicology of Health Hazards study .. .it is important that our constituents have the benefit of CDC's expertise in determining if there are public health risks involved in the Army's proposal."

Andrews said questions have been raised and the purpose of the letter is to request the CDC conduct their own studies.

"I'm not confident in the information given and I will tell you why, in every case mentioned an entity who wants to do this has done a study, they have been hired by people who have a vested interest," Andrews openly stated in a previous interview. "We need a review by people who aren't going to make any money on this effort and the CDC is one."

Corzine Spokesman David Wald said Corzine, is joined with Andrews in his beliefs.

"The key thing is to make sure there is as much information in this as possible," Wald said.

Four lawmakers abstained from voting on the non-binding resolution, but on April 8 the Delaware House of Representatives passed the concurrent Senate resolution unanimously on a voice vote.

n On April 8, direct opposition was expressed by the two states' governors, who asked the Army to reconsider the proposal.

McGreevey and Delaware Gov. Ruth Ann Minner sent a joint letter to Acting Secretary of the Army Department of Defense Les Brownlee raising concerns about the environmental impact the project may impose on the Delaware River and Bay.

"We believe that the Department of the Army and its contractors should reconsider their proposal plan. .. we believe that it is in the best interest of the citizens and natural resources of the States of Delaware and New Jersey that the ultimate compliance with the requirements of the Chemical Weapons Convention takes place in close proximity to the Newport, Ind., depot," the letter stated.

It continued: "The assessment of the potential impacts of discharge to the Delaware Estuary is, in our opinion, neither complete in its execution nor conservative in its assumptions."

Since then opposition has continued and questions for many still remain unanswered.

The New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection Spokesman Fred Mumford said the DEP continues to stand on the same ground as the governors.

McGreevey's spokesman, Micah Rasmussen, on Friday said while officials have been accused of making this a "not-in-my-backyard issue," it is much more than that.

"It's a matter of dumping an agent with unknown impact into a body of water that we all depend on for our livelihood, for our recreation and for our safety," Rasmussen said. "Gov. McGreevey will continue to oppose the plan and he will continue to press for answers to those questions that have been asked."

While it is understandable that one way or another this material is going to have to be disposed of, Rasmussen stressed, the more that is learned about how it will be disposed of -- the better.

"Gov. McGreevey is puzzled as to how the Army could have thought that it was okay to just go forward with such a proposal without knowing what the impact is going to be," Rasmussen said. "He believes that dumping into a body of water so important to the region and the state is unsafe and certainly unproven."

Andrews said that he still believes this is not the best way to dispose of the VX and the proposal should not move forward because of the many unanswered questions about the risks and public health.

He said according to research, the National Science Foundation conducted a study in 2001 of eight proposed methods for disposal of nerve agent and they ranked DuPont's method last. Super critical water oxidation, a method he believes should be used, was second and incineration was the first method.

"There are theories, but we are not talking about theories, we are talking about a deadly chemical nerve agent," he said. "The more I think about it, this plan is wrong for South Jersey and wrong for the country."

With all these opinions and actions in mind the Army guaranteed it will consider every comment from the public and what concerns are left that still need to be addressed. DuPont agreed it will not accept a contract with the Army until the U.S. Center for Disease Control and Prevention completes a formal review of the Army's proposal.

Assemblyman John J. Burzichelli, D-3rd Dist., said as he watched the proposal unfold in the meetings and various groups engaging and raising their voice, it became clear to him that there were more questions than answers reaching the public.

"I commend DuPont for drawing back at the moment, for not signing a contract until they have satisfactorily answered the questions raised," he said. "I think they are demonstrating themselves to be good neighbors and we will see what unfolds."