|
|
|
Back Issues
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ACS
Members can sign up to receive C&EN e-mail
newsletter. 
|
|
|
 Join ACS
|
|
|
|
 August 26, 2003 | | |
DESTROYING CHEMICAL WEAPONS Army's problem-plagued program more costly than originally
planned
LOIS R.
EMBER, C&EN
WASHINGTON
The Army's program to destroy the
nation's arsenal of chemical weapons as mandated by the Chemical
Weapons Convention is way over budget and far behind schedule.
Persistent, pesky problems at operating disposal sites offer little
to encourage hope for better performance.
Originally, the
Army's price tag for the destruction program was pegged at $1.8
billion. That was in 1985. In 2001, the Pentagon's estimate had
spiraled to $24 billion.
In the 1980s, the Army confidently
envisioned eliminating the weapons by 1994. Today, it's likely the
U.S. will have to ask the Organisation for the Prohibition of
Chemical Weapons--the treaty's oversight agency--for a five-year
extension of the 2007 disposal deadline.
Greg Mahall,
spokesman for the Army's Chemical Materials Agency, admits that
"earlier projections were overly optimistic and maybe not based in
reality." But, he adds, "it's a complex and challenging
program."
|
 |
|
BURNED The Army's Anniston
Chemical Agent Disposal Facility has struggled through its
first month of operation as an incineration site for
sarin-filled rockets. COURTESY OF ANNISTON
CHEMICAL AGENT DISPOSAL
FACILITY | In 1982, the Army
selected incineration as its destruction technology, which to date
has destroyed 26% of the 31,500 tons of chemical agents in the U.S.
stockpile. Craig Williams, who directs the Chemical Weapons Working
Group, which opposes incineration, says, "There's no question that
the technology selected has, in significant part, been responsible
for the cost overruns and the time slippage." He also believes that
it will be a "challenge" for the U.S. to meet even the 2012
deadline.
He may have a point if the experience at the
Tooele, Utah, incineration facility is any guide. Tooele--which
originally stored 43% of the nation's chemical weapons--has
destroyed 44% of its holdings over the past seven years. But not
without glitches and delays. Though original projections set 2004 as
the date for complete elimination of its weapons, Tooele will
probably not meet that goal until the end of 2007, fully 11 years
after operations began.
Tooele has eliminated all its sarin
nerve gas and "has started processing its VX nerve gas but not its
mustard gas," Tooele spokeswoman Alaine Southworth says. Disposal of
sarin ran into many problems, including the unintended release of
very small amounts of the nerve agent in May 2000, which shut the
facility down for five months.
Although no VX nerve agent has
been released to the atmosphere, VX disposal is now experiencing
problems. In recent trial burns to destroy VX-filled rockets, the
incineration process has not been able to meet the federal standard
for release of polychlorinated biphenyls. "PCB emissions were too
high, so we stopped processing the VX rockets until we can resolve
the problem," Southworth explains.
VX rockets are encased in
fiberglass firing tubes, which are the only parts of the weapon
known to contain PCBs, Mahall explains. According to air samples
taken during incineration, PCBs were not destroyed to the 99.9999%
level required by the facility's permit. However, Mahall points out
that when "natural gas--not VX--was incinerated, we still got
readings for PCBs above allowable permit levels."
Additional
air samples have been sent to the original testing lab and to
another lab to determine whether the readings were the result of
incomplete burning or a lab error. Until the analyses come back,
Tooele has ceased destroying the rockets. VX-filled warheads, which
are not encased in firing tubes and pose no PCB problem, are still
being destroyed.
The Army's Newport, Ind., site also contains
VX, but in ton containers not weapons. It, too, is running into
problems, though they differ from those at Tooele. Because of
political pressure there and at the Army's sites in Aberdeen, Md.,
Pueblo, Colo., and Bluegrass, Ky., these chemical arsenals will be
chemically neutralized, not incinerated.
Originally,
Newport's more than 1,200 tons of VX were to be neutralized on-site
with sodium hydroxide, followed by supercritical water oxidation of
the hydrolysate. To build such a facility would take some time, and
after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, the Army decided that
it would be safer for the public to quickly neutralize the VX and
send the much less toxic hydrolysate off-site for further
treatment.
VX neutralization was to begin this October, and
the hydrolysate sent to a Perma-Fix facility in Dayton, Ohio, for
biodegradation. This plan has run into fierce opposition. "It
doesn't appear as if the counties around Dayton will accept the
hydrolysate," Mahall says.
In the meantime, Parsons, the
engineering firm contracted to build the neutralization facility at
Newport, has been instructed to build a wet sprinkler system as a
backup to the already-planned dry-chemical fire suppression system.
Design, installation, and testing of the sprinkler system will take
four to six months, which means that neutralization will not begin
until next January at the earliest, Newport spokeswoman Terry Arthur
says.
Arthur points out yet another problem--the analytical
method used to measure the level of VX in the hydrolysate. By law,
under the existing permit, the Army is allowed 230 ppb of VX in the
hydrolysate. However, Arthur says, "The Army has committed to the
community not to ship hydrolysate off-site unless the VX levels are
20 ppb or lower, and we can't do that now." As measured, caustic
neutralization produces a hydrolysate containing 40 to 80 ppb of
VX.
It's unclear whether the problem lies in the
neutralization process or with the analytical method used to detect
VX. Glen Shonkwiler, the lead environmental engineer at Newport,
says the GC-ion trap mass spectrometry system used to measure VX
requires a hexane acid extraction of the hydrolysate. He speculates
that "the extraction process may be creating VX or an
interferent."
The on-site neutralization plant has been
built, and the decision about what to do with the hydrolysate is
likely to be made by the Army within the next few weeks. Options are
to "tank farm" it on-site until a supercritical water oxidation
facility can be built, send it to another Perma-Fix facility for
biodegradation, or send it to DuPont's Environmental Solutions
Chamber Works facility in Deepwater, N.J., for
biodegradation.
Chamber Works is already receiving
hydrolysate from the Army's Aberdeen site. At Aberdeen, mustard gas
in more than 1,800 ton-containers is being neutralized with warm
water in a plant built and operated by Bechtel Aberdeen. There have
been some start-up glitches, but the plant has processed 52
containers with no chemical agent releases or worker
exposures.
The Army's Anniston, Ala., site, built in a
residential area, has also been destroying its stocks of chemical
weapons--not with neutralization but incineration. The Army has
argued that lessons learned from its experience in burning weapons
at the now closed Johnston Atoll facility, in the Pacific Ocean, and
at Tooele would eliminate start-up problems at other incinerator
sites. That has not been the case at Anniston.
At press time,
Anniston had destroyed 487 sarin-filled rockets out of a total of
nearly 43,000. But, in its first two weeks of operation last month,
the incinerator was shut down nearly 30% of the time, for safety
reasons, spokesman Michael Abrams says.
Incinerators at
Umatilla, Ore., and Pine Bluff, Ark., and neutralization facilities
at Pueblo and Bluegrass have not yet begun destroying their
stockpiles.
|
|
Chemical &
Engineering News Copyright © 2003 American Chemical
Society |
|
|
|
 |
 |
|
Related
Stories |
Army Incinerator Fires Up [C&EN, Aug. 18, 2003]
Lawsuit Seeks To Halt Chemical Arms
Burning [C&EN, Mar. 31, 2003]
Army
creates new agency for chemical arms [C&EN,
Mar. 3, 2003]
Incineration
of chemical weapons agents deemed safe [C&EN, Dec.
9, 2002]
ARMY
ASKS TO BURN ROCKETS [C&EN, Aug. 19,
2002]
DESTROYING
CHEMICAL WEAPONS [C&EN, Aug. 21,
2001]
| |
 |
|
|
 |
|
|