The U.S. Army is in the process of destroying the nation's stockpile of aging chemical weapons stored at eight locations in the continental United States and on Johnston Atoll in the Pacific. Originally, incineration was chosen for the destruction of these stores, but this method has met with public opposition, and Congress directed the Army to develop alternative technologies for destroying the stockpiles in Pueblo, CO and Richmond, KY. To assist the Army in this process, the NRC was asked to evaluate the engineering design study of the three Blue Grass candidates. This book presents an analysis of various issues pertaining to the proposed engineering design package for the Blue Grass facility.

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.

The U.S. Army Program Manager for Assembled Chemical Weapons Alternatives (PMACWA) is charged with disposing of chemical weapons as stored at two sites: Pueblo, Colorado, and Blue Grass, Kentucky. In accordance with congressional mandates, technologies other than incineration are to be used if they are as safe and as cost effective. The weapons are to be disposed of in compliance with the Chemical Weapons Convention. Although an element of the U.S. Army, the PMACWA is responsible to the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Acquisitions, Technology, and Logistics for completing this mission. This book deals with the expected significant quantities of secondary wastes that will be generated during operations of the facilities and their closure. While there are only estimates for the waste quantities that will be generated, they provide a good basis for planning and developing alternatives for waste disposal while the plants are still in the design phase. Establishing efficient disposal options for the secondary wastes can enable more timely and cost-effective operation and closure of the facilities.

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.

As the result of disposal practices from the early to mid-twentieth century, approximately 250 sites in 40 states, the District of Columbia, and 3 territories are known or suspected to have buried chemical warfare materiel (CWM). Much of this CWM is likely to occur in the form of small finds that necessitate the continuation of the Army's capability to transport treatment systems to disposal locations for destruction. Of greatest concern for the future are sites in residential areas and large sites on legacy military installations. The Army mission regarding the remediation of recovered chemical warfare materiel (RCWM) is turning into a program much larger than the existing munition and hazardous substance cleanup programs. The Army asked the Nation Research Council (NRC) to examine this evolving mission in part because this change is significant and becoming even more prominent as the stockpile destruction is nearing completion. One focus in this report is the current and future status of the Non-Stockpile Chemical Material Project (NSCMP), which now plays a central role in the remediation of recovered chemical warfare materiel and which reports to the Chemical Materials Agency. Remediation of Buried Chemical Warfare Materiel also reviews current supporting technologies for cleanup of CWM sites and surveys organizations involved with remediation of suspected CWM disposal sites to determine current practices and coordination. In this report, potential deficiencies in operational areas based on the review of current supporting technologies for cleanup of CWM sites and develop options for targeted research and development efforts to mitigate potential problem areas are identified.

By direction of Congress, the U.S. Department of Defense's (DoD's) program manager for the Assembled Chemical Weapons Assessment (PMACWA) asked the National Research Council (NRC) Committee on Review and Evaluation of Alternative Technologies for Demilitarization of Assembled Chemical Weapons: Phase II (the ACW II committee) to conduct an independent scientific and technical assessment of three alternative technologies (referred to as Demo II) under consideration for the destruction of assembled chemical weapons at U.S. chemical weapons storage sites. The three technologies are AEA Technologies Corporation's (AEA's) electrochemical oxidation process; the transpiring-wall supercritical water oxidation and gasphase chemical reduction processes of Foster Wheeler/Eco Logic/Kvaerner (FW/EL/K); and Teledyne-Commodore's solvated electron process. Each of these technologies represents an alternative to incineration for the complete destruction of chemical agents and associated energetic materials. The demonstration tests were approved by the PMACWA after an initial assessment of each technology. The results of that initial assessment were reviewed by an earlier NRC committee, the Committee on Review and Evaluation of Alternative Technologies for Demilitarization of Assembled Chemical Weapons (the ACW I committee). For the present review, the committee conducted an indepth examination of each technology provider's data, analyses, and demonstration test results for the critical components tested. This review report supplements the ACW I report and considers the demonstration performance of the Demo II candidate technologies and their readiness for advancement to pilot-scale implementation. Because testing in these areas is ongoing, the committee decided to cut short its fact-finding efforts for input to this report as of March 30, 2001.

In 1996, Congress enacted directing the Department of Defense to assess and demonstrate technology alternatives to incineration for destruction of the chemical weapons stored at Pueblo Chemical and Blue Grass Army Depots. Since then, the National Research Council (NRC) has been carrying out evaluations of candidate technologies including reviews of engineering design studies and demonstration testing. Most recently, the NRC was asked by the Army to evaluate designs for pilot plants at Pueblo and Blue Grass. These pilot plants would use chemical neutralization for destroying the chemical agent and the energetics in the munitions stockpiles of these two depots. This report provides the interim assessment of the Pueblo Chemical Agent Destruction Pilot Plant (PCAPP) to permit adjustment of any significant problems as soon as possible. The report presents an analysis of the issues about the current PCAPP design and a series of findings and recommendations about ways to reduce concerns with involve the public more heavily in the process.