Nonstockpile program

There are certain chemical munitions, materiel, and facilities that are not specifically included in the U.S. stockpile of unitary chemical weapons (those containing a single lethal chemical agent). These items are referred to as nonstockpile chemical warfare materiel and consist of binary chemical weapons, miscellaneous chemical warfare materiel, recovered chemical weapons, former chemical weapon production facilities, and buried chemical warfare materiel. 

In 1993, the United States signed the U.N.-sponsored Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production, Stockpiling and the Use of Chemical Weapons and on Their Destruction, commonly referred to as the Chemical Weapons Convention. The United States agreed to dispose of (1) binary chemical weapons, recovered chemical weapons, and former chemical weapon production facilities within 10 years and (2) miscellaneous chemical warfare materiel within five years of the date the convention becomes effective. If ratified by the U.S. Senate, the convention becomes effective 180 days after the 65th nation ratifies the treaty, but not sooner than January 13, 1995. Under the terms of the convention, chemical weapons buried prior to 1977 are exempt from disposal as long as they remain buried. In the United States, burial was 

In the fiscal year 1993 National Defense Authorization Act (P.L. 102-484), the Congress directed the Army to report on its plans for disposing of all nonstockpile chemical warfare materiel within the United States. In 1933, the Army issued a report describing the nonstockpile chemical materiel, potential disposal methods, transportation alternatives, and disposal cost and schedule estimates. The report concluded that it would cost the Army 1.1 billion ( 930 million in direct project disposal costs and 170 million in programmatic costs) to destroy, primarily by incineration, demolition, and neutralization, the nonstockpile chemical materiel required by the convention within the required time frames. 

These cost estimates indicate that the nonstockpile disposal program will cost over 17 billion which is more than the chemical stockpile program. 

Whenever possible, the Army plans to dispose of nonstockpile chemical materiel on-site. However, there may be occasions when it is not feasible or practical for the Army to do so, and transportation to another disposal location may be required. Factors the Army intends to consider are population proximity and density, chemical weapon type, condition of the munitions, and public safety and environmental policy. In addition, the opinions and concerns of the affected states, local governments, and the public will affect the Army s decisions. For example, there is strong public opposition to incineration and transportation of chemical weapons across state boundaries. 

---

This opposition, which has come from several citizen groups, environmental organizations, and state governments, has extended the environmental review and approval process and resulted in postponing the construction and operation of fixed incinerators. The actual disposal methods for the nonstockpile program will be selected by the Army after comprehensive environmental reviews are completed with the participation of the affected states, local governments, and public. 

Plasma arc technology has been used successfully in Europe to destroy chemical warfare material but has not been permitted in the United States. Currendy, PMCD is optimistic that it will have little difficulty in obtaining a permit. They have identified several plasma arc firms in this country that have operational units, but none has destroyed a CW-related waste stream. If the ACWA program does not develop a continuous SCWO system that is cost-effective for use on the quantities of materiel to be destroyed in the nonstockpile program and if a permit for the plasma arc technology cannot be obtained in time, the Army may be forced to incinerate its waste streams to comply with the CWC treaty deadline of April 2007... 

The primary component of AR 50-6 that affects the nonstockpile program is that pertaining to recovered chemical warfare material (RCWM). These requirements are described in Chapter 12 of AR 50-6. The specific definition of RCWM is as follows ... 

The NRC s Board on Army Science and Technology is involved in studies of the destruction of stockpile and nonstockpile chemical munitions. The Committee on Review and Evaluation of the Army Chemical Stockpile Disposal Program and the Committee on Review and Evaluation of the Army Chemical Non-Stockpile Materiel Disposal Program are reviewing the technical aspects of the Army s disposal methods on an ongoing basis (see NRC 1999a, b). 

The U.S. Army Chemical Demilitarization and Remediation Activity is responsible for implementing the destruction of all U.S. chemical warfare-related material, including the chemical weapons stockpile and nonstockpile chemical material, and for insuring maximum protection to the environment, general public, and personnel involved in the destruction. The activity s office of Program Manager for Nonstockpile Chemical Material is responsible for ... 

Although the Army Chemical Demilitarization and Remediation Activity has overall responsibility for disposing of nonstockpile chemical material, other organizations within or outside DOD contribute to the disposal program. The involvement of the following organizations depends on the location and particulars of the material, storage area, or burial site ... 

The nonstockpile disposal program is vulnerable to change because it depends on disposal methods and destruction rates that have not been demonstrated. 

As demonstrated in the stockpile disposal program, there is considerable public opposition to the incineration of chemical munitions or agents. However, the Army based its 1993 preliminary cost and schedule estimates on the use of incinerators to destroy potentially large portions of its nonstockpile chemical materiel. The opposition centers around concerns about adverse health effects and environmental hazards. 

Nonstockpile Experience at Pine Bluff and Schofield Barracks Allan Caplan, Project Engineer, Non-Stockpile Program, Chemical Materials Agency... 

USACMDA (1993a) Interim survey and analysis report. Program Manager for Non-Stockpile Chemical Materiel, Nonstockpile Chemical Materiel Program, U.S. Department of the Army, Chemical Materiel Destruction Agency, Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD. 

The MMD program has been suspended this means that the liquid waste streams generated by nonstockpile mobile treatment systems will be primarily from the EDS, with a small volume from the RRS. 

The Committee on Review and Evaluation of the Army Non-Stockpile Chemical Materiel Disposal Program was appointed by the National Research Council (NRC) to conduct studies on technical aspects of the U.S. Army Non-Stockpile Chemical Materiel Disposal Program. During its first year, the committee evaluated the Army s plans to dispose of chemical agent identification sets (CAIS)—test kits used for training soldiers. During this second year, the committee has evaluated nonincineration technologies that could be used for the treatment of wastes from the neutralization of nonstockpile materiel. 

Prior to 1991, efforts to dispose of CWM were limited to stoclq)ile materiel. A part of the 1991 Defense Appropriations Act (House Appropriations Report 101-822) directed the Secretary of Defense to establish an office with the responsibility of destroying nonstockpile materiel. The program manager for NSCMP was assigned this task under the newly established U.S. Army Chemical Materiel Destruction Agency (NRC, 1999a). 

---