FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

Taking on the Pentagon

In Alabama, Arkansas, Oregon and Utah, the U.S. Army is preparing to spend a decade incinerating 12,000 tons of leftover “mustard agent” — a chemical weapon intended to immobilize enemy soldiers by producing painful, debilitating blisters on skin and lungs. In Tooele County, Utah, where about half the nation’s mustard agent resides, incineration began last week.[1]

The mustard agent is presently stored in aging cannisters on military bases in the four states and the Army says it is safer to incinerate it than to do nothing.

But this week a coalition of citizens issued a sophisticated engineering report arguing that there’s a third alternative besides “do nothing” and incineration: chemical neutralization. The Chemical Weapons Working Group (CWWG) in Berea, Kentucky concluded that it seems feasible for the Army to neutralize mustard agent using warm water.

CWWG acknowledged that it lacked sufficient information to demand that the Army immediately shift from incineration to neutralization. Instead, they want the Army itself to study chemical neutralization, with citizen participation. “The purpose of the report is to try and compel the Army to perform due diligence of the fundamental questions,” says Craig Williams the leader of CWWG.

Neither CWWG nor its constituent citizen groups oppose destruction of the chemical warfare agents — they just want it done as safely as possible.

This is a classic example of citizens taking a modern approach to community protection — setting goals (destruction of the mustard agent), examining available alternatives to find the least hazardous, and creating opportunities to participate in decision-making. And, as Elizabeth Crowe of CWWG points out, it shows that it is never too late to pay attention to new information, to heed early warnings and invoke the precautionary principle.

The Army announced new information recently — it discovered the toxic metal mercury in the mustard agent at the level of 65 parts per million (800 pounds of mercury in 6200 tons of mustard agent). If this level of mercury were present in all 12,000 tons, the incinerator program would be releasing 1560 pounds of mercury into the environment — a very large release of a metal that is poisonous in microgram quantities. In addition, there’s a distinct possibility that the Army has underestimated the total quantity of mercury involved.

So far, the Army’s response to the mercury problem has been to say it will burn the mustard agent more slowly than initially planned, so that the concentration of mercury in the incinerator’s smoke stack will never exceed the air quality standards set by U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Of course with this approach, the mercury emitted would still total 1560 pounds — it would just leave the stack more slowly. On the other hand, EPA announced recently that it is now re-evaluating controls for incinerators — which could put the Army’s chemical weapons incinerators out of compliance and delay the whole program. Williams says this is another reason for the Army to abandon incineration now, to avoid an unpleasant surprise later.

History of the Program

The Army decided in 1984 to incinerate leftover chemical warfare agents — “mustard gas” (which is actually a liquid), plus far more deadly agents, VX and GB, also known as sarin, which are true gases — at eight locations: Anniston, Alabama; Pine Bluff, Arkansas; Umatilla, Oregon; Tooele County, Utah; Aberdeen, Maryland; Richmond, Kentucky; Pueblo, Colorado; and Newport, Indiana.

By 1985, opposition was growing at each location as people began wondering whether incinerating chemical warfare agents could be done without accidentally releasing deadly gases. No one opposed destruction of the chemical warfare agents — but many questioned whether incineration was the best option.

The Army basically stonewalled the questions, insisting that it knew best. Citizens had reason to wonder where the Army’s programs always made good sense.

In the mid-1980s, the Army built an experimental incinerator for chemical weapons on Johnston Island, an atoll 700 miles southwest of Hawaii. Congress’s General Accounting Office examined the test program and reported that “unplanned and unscheduled maintenance downtime problems… occurred on an almost daily basis.” Still the Army insisted all was well — a stance of denial that did not inspire confidence in communities slated for incinerators of their own.

In 1989 it was revealed that the Army owned at least 14,000 contaminated sites — including some of the largest and most dangerous environmental hazards imaginable. For example, it was revealed that over the years the Army had fired or dumped an estimated four million rounds of ordinance into the upper reaches of the Chesapeake Bay near Aberdeen. Many of these rounds were unexploded bombs and rockets filled with mustard agent, nerve gas, chlorine gas, or tear gas.[2] They have never been recovered. Nautical charts show the area as “restricted — keep out” but people who are fishing in a skiff don’t necessarily consult charts.

In 1991 community groups from the eight communities targeted for chemical weapons incinerators formally launched a coalition, the Chemical Weapons Working Group (CWWG), led by Craig Williams, a Vietnam veteran in Kentucky. Since then their coalition has grown to over 200 groups nationwide.

The same year, 1991, CWWG commissioned a study of alternative methods for destroying chemical warfare agents. That study indicated that chemical neutralization would work well for mustard agent. Mustard agent contains chlorine, which — if burned — would produce dioxins and furans, among the most toxic chemicals known to science. Neutralization would avoid production of these most toxic of byproducts.

The Army stonewalled and resisted, but CWWG and its constituent citizen groups went to Washington and bent the ears of their Congressional delegations. The citizens’ position — we want this done, but we want it done as safely as possible — resonated. Eventually Congress ordered the Army to consider alternatives to incineration.

As a direct result of CWWG’s member groups bringing relentless pressure on the Army at every possible opportunity, providing detailed alternatives for the Army to consider, and getting Congressional staff involved — the Army eventually abandoned the incinerators planned for Colorado, Indiana, Kentucky, and Maryland,[3] where it proceeded to neutralize 1818 tons of mustard agent at Aberdeen Proving Ground without mishap.

Now CWWG wants the Army to consider doing the same thing with mustard agent at all the other sites. The report released this week showed, from an engineering perspective, that it seems feasible and affordable to either retrofit incinerators with neutralizers, or to build new neutralizers near each existing incinerator.

The Army now has more experience neutralizing mustard agent (1818 tons) than it has incinerating mustard agent (67 tons) — so the Army may have a hard time squirming out of the embarrassing position CWWG has put it in. And of course if the Army balks, CWWG has already demonstrated that it knows how turn the screws in Washington.

CWWG has demonstrated that a tiny group of citizens can take on a multi-billion-dollar Pentagon program and win. By sticking to their knitting, keeping their eye on the prize, and never, ever giving up, Craig Williams and his seasoned band of incineration fighters across the country have proven once again, as Margaret Mead famously said:

“Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it’s the only thing that ever has.”

PETER MONTAGUE is editor of the indispensable Rachel’s Health and Democracy, where this essay originally appeared. He can be reached at: peter@rachel.org

[1] Patty Henetz, “Cold war’s killer gas on way to extinction,” Salt Lake City (Utah) Tribune May 19, 2006.

[2] John M. Bull, “Army Site May be Too Hazardous to Clean,” Harrisburg (Pa.) Patriot-News Feb. 26, 1989, pg. F1. And John M. R. Bull, Phil Galewitz, and Kenn Marshall, “Nation’s military has toxic embrace,” Harrisburg (Pa.) Patriot-News Feb. 26, 1989, pg. A1.

[3] Juliet Eilprin, “Chemical weapons disposal drawn-out,” Deseret News (Salt Lake City, Utah), July 8, 2006.

 

 

More articles by:

Peter Montague is a fellow with the Science & Environmental Health Network, living in New Jersey.

July 19, 2018
Rajai R. Masri
The West’s Potential Symbiotic Contributions to Freeing a Closed Muslim Mind
Jennifer Matsui
The Blue Pill Presidency
Ryan LaMothe
The Moral and Spiritual Bankruptcy of White Evangelicals
Paul Tritschler
Negative Capability: a Force for Change?
Patrick Bond
State of the BRICS Class Struggle: ‘Social Dialogue’ Reform Frustrations
Rev. William Alberts
A Well-Kept United Methodist Church Secret
Raouf Halaby
Joseph Harsch, Robert Fisk, Franklin Lamb: Three of the Very Best
George Ochenski
He Speaks From Experience: Max Baucus on “Squandered Leadership”
Ted Rall
Right Now, It Looks Like Trump Will Win in 2020
David Swanson
The Intelligence Community Is Neither
Andrew Moss
Chaos or Community in Immigration Policy
Kim Scipes
Where Do We Go From Here? How Do We Get There?
July 18, 2018
Bruce E. Levine
Politics and Psychiatry: the Cost of the Trauma Cover-Up
Frank Stricker
The Crummy Good Economy and the New Serfdom
Linda Ford
Red Fawn Fallis and the Felony of Being Attacked by Cops
David Mattson
Entrusting Grizzlies to a Basket of Deplorables?
Stephen F. Eisenman
Want Gun Control? Arm the Left (It Worked Before)
CJ Hopkins
Trump’s Treasonous Traitor Summit or: How Liberals Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the New McCarthyism
Patrick Bond
State of the BRICS Class Struggle: Repression, Austerity and Worker Militancy
Dan Corjescu
The USA and Russia: Two Sides of the Same Criminal Corporate Coin
The Hudson Report
How Argentina Got the Biggest Loan in the History of the IMF
Kenn Orphan
You Call This Treason?
Max Parry
Ukraine’s Anti-Roma Pogroms Ignored as Russia is Blamed for Global Far Right Resurgence
Ed Meek
Acts of Resistance
July 17, 2018
Conn Hallinan
Trump & The Big Bad Bugs
Robert Hunziker
Trump Kills Science, Nature Strikes Back
John Grant
The Politics of Cruelty
Kenneth Surin
Calculated Buffoonery: Trump in the UK
Binoy Kampmark
Helsinki Theatrics: Trump Meets Putin
Patrick Bond
BRICS From Above, Seen Critically From Below
Jim Kavanagh
Fighting Fake Stories: The New Yorker, Israel and Obama
Daniel Falcone
Chomsky on the Trump NATO Ruse
W. T. Whitney
Oil Underground in Neuquén, Argentina – and a New US Military Base There
Doug Rawlings
Ken Burns’ “The Vietnam War” was Nominated for an Emmy, Does It Deserve It?
Rajan Menon
The United States of Inequality
Thomas Knapp
Have Mueller and Rosenstein Finally Gone Too Far?
Cesar Chelala
An Insatiable Salesman
Dean Baker
Truth, Trump and the Washington Post
Mel Gurtov
Human Rights Trumped
Binoy Kampmark
Putin’s Football Gambit: How the World Cup Paid Off
July 16, 2018
Sheldon Richman
Trump Turns to Gaza as Middle East Deal of the Century Collapses
Charles Pierson
Kirstjen Nielsen Just Wants to Protect You
Brett Wilkins
The Lydda Death March and the Israeli State of Denial
Patrick Cockburn
Trump Knows That the US Can Exercise More Power in a UK Weakened by Brexit
Robert Fisk
The Fisherman of Sarajevo Told Tales Past Wars and Wars to Come
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail