Agents destructive

Following confirmation of agent destruction, HC1 is neutralized with sodium hydroxide. 

Recommendation 5-5. The Army should develop and demonstrate innovative analytical techniques that require significantly less time than present techniques to verify agent destruction for both VX and HD hydrolysates at the required detection limits. 

A critical consideration is identifying an off-site waste processor who is able and willing to receive the carbon filter material from the VOC treatment step. A waste processor will certainly require that VOCs be stripped from the hydrolysate only after agent destruction has been confirmed by chemical analysis. Consequently, the spent activated carbon used to recover VOCs should be agent free and can be treated like any other commercially produced spent filter material. If the spent activated carbon cannot be certified as agent free, it will have to be managed in the same manner as spent activated carbon that is known or likely to be agent contaminated. 

Monitoring for the presence of agent in process streams is necessary to verify agent destruction after neutralization and... 

Vapor-phase monitoring to meet the 3X specification will most likely not be sufficient to verify agent destruction in the solid materials from the bulk sites because these materials could contain either strongly adsorbed agent or occluded agent that could be released in the future. Because of the unique analytical interferences resulting from the composition of particular waste streams, the measurement methods will have to be specific to each waste stream, and each method will have to be validated for the specific waste matrix. Criteria for determining the detection limit for each method should be based on the hazard and risk evaluations for that waste stream. 

Verification of the destruction of mustard in HD hydrolysates has not presented the same technical challenges as VX, but it does require the use of NMR analysis, which takes four to six hours to measure both mustard and sulfonium ions (U.S. Army, 1998b). Verification of agent destruction also constitutes a critical path item in the operational cycle of each facility. Currently, analysis of each batch of hydrolysate takes six hours, provided that reliable analytical results are obtained from the first analysis. Thus, reducing the time required to verify agent destruction in process streams would significantly improve the overall processing efficiency and schedule. 

In both the baseline incineration system and the modified baseline process, energetics are removed in explosive containment rooms (ECRs) as part of the agent destruction operation in the munitions demilitarization building (MDB). A work-in-progress (WIP) buffer inventory is provided between the energetics removal step and the rest of the operation. The same type of energetics removal equipment is used in both the baseline system and the modified baseline process. 

U.S. Army. 1999a. Status of Agent Destruction at JACADS and TOCDF as of 21 July. Aberdeen Proving Ground, Md. U.S. Army Program Manager for Chemical Demilitarization. 

The sites at Aberdeen, Maryland, and Newport, Indiana, have only one agent each (HD at Aberdeen and VX at Newport) stored in bulk containers. These sites will use hot aqueous hydrolysis (hot aqueous caustic hydrolysis in the case of VX) as the first step in agent destruction. Batch analyses of liquid hydrolysates will be necessary at both sites to ensure that the defined degree of agent destruction (99.9999 percent) is met prior to secondary treatment. 

Downey KW, Snow RH, Hazlebeck DA, Roberts AJ. Corrosion and chemical agent destruction, research on supercritical waste oxidation of hazardous military waste. Innovations in Supercritical Fluids, Chapter 21. Washington, D.C. American Chemical Society, 1995. 

Of the five remaining major waste streams, spent activated carbon is being stored at each facility for later disposal. Munitions bodies and other scrap metal are sent to off-site smelters after being thermally treated to a clean condition in the MPF at the four incineration-based facilities. Because on-site secondary waste processing capacity is limited, demilitarization protective ensemble suits are shipped off-site or stored until they can be treated on-site in the MPF when it has an opening in its schedule or at the end of agent destruction operations. 

Finding 3-3. The availability and capacity of equipment for the concurrent treatment of secondary waste during agent disposal operations or changeovers at chemical agent destruction facilities is severely limited in comparison with the capacity available at off-site commercial treatment facilities that could process the waste. 

Disposal Facility (TOCDF) in Tooele, Utah, which began agent destruction operations in 1996. It was followed by incineration facilities at three additional sites the Anniston Chemical Agent Disposal Facility (ANCDF) in Anniston, Alabama the Pine Bluff Chemical Agent Disposal Facility (PBCDF) in Pine Bluff, Arkansas and the Umatilla Chemical Agent Disposal Facility (UMCDF) in Umatilla, Oregon. 

LSitc reported agent destruction progress as of February 2007. 

SOURCE Agent destruction status as of February 28, 2007. Available at http //www.cma.army.mi1/home.aspx. Last accessed March 26, 2007. 

Direct chemical agent destruction operations as well as indirect or peripheral operations all result in secondary waste. Indirect or peripheral operations critical to chemical agent disposal facilities include laboratory operations, operations associated with protection of personnel or the environment, and operations associated with maintenance of the facility. The links between direct and indirect process operations and secondary waste streams are described next. 

At baseline incineration facilities, CMA has conducted separate campaigns to dispose of each chemical agent and munition type because of monitoring and processing constraints. This approach is reflected in the provisions of the site-specific RCRA permits. In all cases, trial burns have been conducted for each agent destruction campaign at each chemical agent disposal facility. 

There are no commercial TSDFs in Indiana to support NECDF s closure activities. To date, NECDF has been permitted to ship limited quantities of its secondary wastes to out-of-state permitted disposal facilities. However, additional quantities need to be shipped while bulk VX disposal operations are still ongoing so that the wastes from agent destruction operations do... 

Advancement of the munitions in the demil operations by conveyors to the furnaces and explosive agent destruction operations have been reviewed with possible failure modes, fire, toxic release, and deterrent actions. 

Figure 24. CAMDS chemical agent destruct facility filter system...

Figure 25. Chemical filter installation at CAMDS agent destruct facility...

Interview with Mickey Morales, Blue Grass Chemical Agent-Destruction Pilot Plant Contractor, Bechtel Parsons Blue Grass Team (12 April 2004). 

SECONDARY WASTE DISPOSAL PLANNING FOR THE BLUE GRASS and PUEBLO CHEMICAL AGENT DESTRUCTION PILOT PLANTS... 

---