The U.S. Army's Chemical Materials Agency (CMA) currently oversees contracts for the operation of chemical agent stockpile incineration facilities at four disposal sites. Because the period of time required to dispose of these chemical agents has grown beyond that originally planned, the Army is becoming concerned about the possibility of growing operational problems as the processing equipment ages. To help address these concerns, the CMA requested the NRC to assess whether current policies and practices will be able to adequately anticipate and address facility obsolescence issues. This report presents a review of potential infrastructure and equipment weaknesses given that the facilities are being operated well beyond their original design lifetime; an assessment of the Army's current and evolving obsolescence management programs; and offers recommendations about how the programs may be improved and strengthened to permit safe and expeditious completion of agent stockpile destruction and facility closure.

Under the direction of the U.S. Army's Chemical Materials Agency (CMA) and mandated by Congress, the nation is destroying its chemical weapons stockpile. Large quantities of secondary waste are being generated in the process, and managing these wastes safely and effectively is a critical part of CMA's weapons disposal program. To assist, the CMA asked the NRC to examine the environmental and regulatory requirements that secondary waste treatment is subject to, and to assess best practices by industry in meeting such requirements for similar facilities. This book presents an overview of secondary wastes from chemical agent disposal facilities (CDF), a comparison of CDF and industry experience, site-specific analysis of major secondary waste issues, an examination of closure wastes, and findings and recommendations.

The U.S. Army's Chemical Materials Agency (CMA) currently oversees contracts for the operation of chemical agent stockpile incineration facilities at four disposal sites. Because the period of time required to dispose of these chemical agents has grown beyond that originally planned, the Army is becoming concerned about the possibility of growing operational problems as the processing equipment ages. To help address these concerns, the CMA requested the NRC to assess whether current policies and practices will be able to adequately anticipate and address facility obsolescence issues. This report presents a review of potential infrastructure and equipment weaknesses given that the facilities are being operated well beyond their original design lifetime; an assessment of the Army's current and evolving obsolescence management programs; and offers recommendations about how the programs may be improved and strengthened to permit safe and expeditious completion of agent stockpile destruction and facility closure.

In 1994 the National Research Council published Recommendations for the Disposal of Chemical Agents and Munitions, which assessed the status of various alternative destruction technologies in comparison to the Army's baseline incineration system. The volume's main finding was that no alternative technology was preferable to incineration but that work should continue on the neutralization technologies under Army consideration. In light of the fact that alternative technologies have evolved since the 1994 study, this new volume evaluates five Army-chosen alternatives to the baseline incineration system for the disposal of the bulk nerve and mustard agent stored in ton containers at Army sites located in Newport, Indiana, and Aberdeen, Maryland, respectively. The committee assessed each technology by conducting site visits to the locations of the technology proponent companies and by meeting with state regulators and citizens of the affected areas. This volume makes recommendations to the Army on which, if any, of the five technologies has reached a level of maturity appropriate for consideration for pilot-scale testing at the two affected sites.

The main approach adopted by the U.S. Army for destruction of all declared chemical weapon materiel (CWM) is incineration. There has been considerable public opposition to this approach, however, and the Army is developing a mix of fixed site and mobile treatment technologies to dispose of non-stockpile CWM. To assist in this effort, the Army requested NRC to review and evaluate these technologies, and to assess its plans for obtaining regulatory approval for and to involve the public in decisions about the application of those technologies. This book presents an assessment of non-stockpile treatment options and the application of these systems to the non-stockpile inventory, of regulatory and permitting issues, and of the role of the public.

The U.S. Army is in the process of destroying its chemical weapons stockpile and related, non-stockpile chemical materiel. At the request of the Army, the National Research Council (NRC) has published a number of studies over the last 16 years providing scientific and technical advice on that disposal effort. For this study, the NRC was asked to assess the design of the facility at the Pine Bluff (Arkansas) Arsenal intended to dispose of a large amount of non-stockpile materiel, including 1250 recovered old chemical weapons. This is the first of a series of studies directed at reviewing and assessing the Product Manager for Non-Stockpile Chemical Materiel initiatives for destruction of this materiel. The report provides the results of the Pine Bluff assessment. It includes a description of the Pine Bluff facility; a discussion of worker and public safety; management issues; regulatory, permitting, and public involvement; and the role of alternative destruction technologies currently residing at the facility.

Chemical warfare materiel (CWM) encompasses diverse items that were used during 60 years of efforts by the United States to develop a capability for conducting chemical warfare. Non-Stockpile CWM (NSCWM) is materiel not included in the current U.S. inventory of chemical munitions and includes buried materiel, recovered materiel, components of binary chemical weapons, former production facilities, and miscellaneous materiel. Because NSCWM is stored or buried at many locations, the Army is developing transportable treatment systems that can be moved from site to site as needed. Originally, the Army planned to develop three transportable treatment systems for nonstockpile chemical materiel: the rapid response system (RRS), the munitions management device (MMD), and the explosive destruction system (EDS). This report supplements an earlier report that evaluated eight alternative technologies for destruction of the liquid waste streams from two of the U.S. Army's transportable treatment systems for nonstockpile chemical materiel: the RRS and the MMD. This report evaluates the same technologies for the destruction of liquid waste streams produced by the EDS and discusses the regulatory approval issues and obstacles for the combined use of the EDS and the alternative technologies that treat the EDS secondary waste streams. Although it focuses on the destruction of EDS neutralent, it also takes into consideration the ability of posttreatment technologies to process the more dilute water rinses that are used in the EDS following treatment with a reagent.

The Program Manager for Assembled Chemical Weapons Assessment (PMACWA) of the Department of Defense (DOD) requested the National Research Council (NRC) to assess the engineering design studies (EDSs) developed by Parsons/Honeywell and General Atomics for a chemical demilitarization facility to completely dispose of the assembled chemical weapons at the Pueblo Chemical Depot in Pueblo, Colorado. To accomplish the task, the NRC formed the Committee on Review and Evaluation of Alternative Technologies for Demilitarization of Assembled Chemical Weapons: Phase II (ACW II Committee). This report presents the results of the committee's scientific and technical assessment, which will assist the Office of the Secretary of Defense in selecting the technology package for destroying the chemical munitions at Pueblo. The committee evaluated the engineering design packages proposed by the technology providers and the associated experimental studies that were performed to validate unproven unit operations. A significant part of the testing program involved expanding the technology base for the hydrolysis of energetic materials associated with assembled weapons. This process was a concern expressed by the Committee on Review and Evaluation of Alternative Technologies for Demilitarization of Assembled Chemical Weapons (ACW I Committee) in its original report in 1999 (NRC, 1999). The present study took place as the experimental studies were in progress. In some cases, tests for some of the supporting unit operations were not completed in time for the committee to incorporate results into its evaluation. In those cases, the committee identified and discussed potential problem areas in these operations. Based on its expertise and its aggressive data-gathering activities, the committee was able to conduct a comprehensive review of the test data that had been completed for the overall system design. This report summarizes the study.