CAMDEN -- A South Jersey congressman Monday said he believes special permits are needed before the DuPont Co. moves ahead with a plan to treat the byproduct of a deadly nerve agent for the U.S. Army.
Monday marked the final day for the public comment period on a proposal for DuPont to treat the neutralized byproduct of the VX nerve agent byproduct at its Chambers Works facility in Pennsville. But government officials are still standing strong, demanding to get all the facts and let their voices be heard.
U.S. Rep. Robert Andrews, D-1st Dist., met at the waterfront here Monday morning accompanied by concerned members of environmental groups and announced his request to the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection requiring DuPont seek new water and air permits prior to the disposal process.
Andrews said it has been suggested no additional permits for the treatment and disposal of the wastewater from the VX byproduct into the Delaware River were needed, but he said he respectfully disagrees.
"This is a major decision and they have to do a full environmental review," he said. "Today what I am expressing is they need to go to NJDEP and lay out their case."
He suggested the new permitting process will provide an opportunity for further scrutiny of this proposal by both the qualified experts and the public.
In relation to his concerns, Andrews referred study conducted by the National Research Council, a division of the National Academy of Sciences, in 2001 that determined DuPont's method for disposing of the VX byproduct to be the least effective.
The report evaluated eight different technologies based on collective judgment of a committee of experts focusing on whether the technology is likely to be safe, effective, permitted and consistent with pollution prevention principles.
Ranked in order from one to eight, biodegredation -- the proposed method of disposal for this project -- was ranked last and "least likely to be effective."
"If they are so confident this is so safe why not let them go through with the permitting process and further prove it," Andrews said.
He 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 potential environmental and public health risks involved.
Jane Nogaki, pesticide program coordinator of the New Jersey Environmental Federation, agreed stating "we are opposed to this and we think it is the wrong process and in the wrong place. This is a wrong plan."
Andrews advocates another method which he believes will better suit the needs of disposal in a safer and more environmentally sound manner, the fourth ranking method supercritical water oxidation. He suggests this method be conducted on site in Indiana.
Vice President of Quality Environmental Concepts Edward J. Knorr Jr. said New Jersey carries a legacy of being a "toxic state." However, for the past few years the state has worked diligently with cleanup efforts.
"Now they want us to continue being not only the toxic state, but the experimental state," Knorr said. " ... We don't even know how safe it is."
"The issues today will be the concerns of health factors for tomorrow," he added.
To see a copy of the National Research Council's executive summary and findings, visit http://books.nap.edu/execsumm_pdf/10091.pdf.
Under the proposed contract, the Army would destroy stockpiles of the chemical nerve agent VX at the Newport Chemical Depot in Newport, Ind., where it is currently stored. The hydrolysate would then be transported to the Chambers Works Secured Environmental Treatment facility and further treated before disposal into the Delaware River.
DuPont is currently bidding for the contract to process the wastewater and no contracts have been signed as of yet.