A. “VX in TX”: a Community-Wide Outreach on VX Hydrolysate Disposal in Port Arthur, Texas
The west side of Port Arthur, Texas, is an African-American petrochemical fence-line community that bears a huge burden of health and social stressors. Chronic low level exposures to fugitive emissions, periodic explosions, chemical fires, and industrial production “upsets” coexist with higher than average rates of respiratory disease, blood, bone marrow and organ cancers, and various other indicators of health disparities. In early April 2007, the Department of Defense and Veolia Environmental Services implemented a project to ship 1.8 million gallons of neutralized VX nerve toxin from the Newport Chemical Depot near Terre Haute, Indiana, to Veolia’s toxics disposal facility in Port Arthur for incineration. This VX hydrolysate is scheduled to arrive in weekly convoys of diesel semi-tractors carrying up to a dozen 4,000 gallon shipments of the highly caustic liquid in each seven-day period. This 1000+ mile route spans eight states, and the caustic stock slated for shipping will fill approximately 360 truckloads, necessitating 60 convoy roundtrips of 120,000+ highway miles over 12-18 months. The last few miles of this shipping route skirts the West Port Arthur fence-line.
Most citizens of Port Arthur learned of this project in a local press release synchronized with the departure of the first VX convoy for Veolia’s incinerator. Local groups such as the Community In-Power & Development Association, in conjunction with chemical weapons safety advocates from Newport, Ind., the Chemical Weapons Working Group and a sympathetic Port Arthur city councilman immediately mobilized to gather information about the toxin and build a multi-racial coalition to seek an injunction against future shipments of VX hydrolysate into their community. CIDA Director Hilton Kelley summarized the feeling of concerned citizens in plain-spoken terms: “People have not been warned. It’s not right to the citizens of Port Arthur. We are sick and tired of being the toxic dump for the Unites States.”
|
|
Mr. Hilton Kelley addressing the original rally in the CIDA parking lot on the west side. He's wearing his American Legion cap because the Veolia Environmental Services public relations rep styled this project as an opportunity for Port Arthur to help the country. Hilton served 10 years in the Navy. |
CIDA organized its own press events, rallies and sponsored a forum session on a range of VX issues. Personnel from the University of Texas Medical Branch NIEHS Center in Environmental Toxicology/Public Forum & Toxics Assistance division broadly surveyed organophosphate central nervous system toxins, lethal properties specific to VX, critical differences between VX toxin and neutralized hydrolysate, steps in the hydrolyzing process, chemical characteristics of VX hydrolysate, possible health effects of hydrolysate incineration, other VX disposal options such as Super Critical Water Oxidation, and a historical overview of chemical weapons and the International Chemical Weapons Convention. This forum brought to light a wide range of community questions and concerns that make VX shipments and the incineration process problematic for local residents.
|
|
Photo of a family protesting across from the Veolia Environmental Services incineration facility. |
CIDA, and its local/regional allies, pushed for an injunction, or moratorium, on future shipments and an open and transparent dialogue with the Department of Defense, Veolia Environmental Services and additional stakeholders from local government and industry. CIDA’s Hilton Kelley referred to President Clinton’s Executive Order 12898 - “… each Federal agency … shall identify and address disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects of its programs, policies, and activities on minority populations and low-income populations” - in characterizing this project as an egregious environmental injustice for Port Arthur. Department of Defense and Veolia officials maintain that their plan to incinerate VX hydrolysate poses no untoward threat to human health or the local ecosystem. However, based on CIDA’s plan to seek a legal injunction, a moratorium agreement was reached that shipments would be halted on June 18. The Department of Defense purports plans to address community concerns in a transparent process.
The following are a list of questions and concerns raised by community and researchers:
-
Chemical weapons disposal safety advocates in Newport, Ind., and the nationally focused Chemical Weapons Working Group agree that the safest course would be on-site disposal at the Newport Chemical Depot. This plan would obviate the necessity for inter-state transport and keep the operation centralized and inherently more controllable.
-
Accidents in commercial transportation are quite frequent: 18 wheelers are involved in 400,000 crashes annually and 28-35 percent of the rigs carrying hazardous cargoes spill their contents as result.
-
Previous Department of Defense agreements with Perma-Fix of Dayton, Ohio, and the DuPont Chambers Works in Deepwater, N.J., were withdrawn due to political opposition and community pressure.
-
VX Hydrolysate cleared for shipment to disposal sites must contain no more than 20 parts per billion VX residue & five parts per million EA-2192, a byproduct of the hydrolytic process and also a nerve toxin. Informants at the Newport facility allege that some chemical reformation of VX agent has occurred during storage yielding higher than officially publicized concentrations. Reported concentrations may be as high as 48 parts per billion.
-
These same informants also allege that the Department of Defense hydrolysate testing program is not comprehensive, but based instead on sampling and that no accurate inventory of VX and EA-2192 residues in each specific container actually exists.
-
The Army counters that each container has been tested twice and the hydrolyzed liquid contains only potassium and sodium salts. These dissonant versions of the truth must be vetted.
-
Will the VX hydrolysate be burned separately or in combination with other agents? Does Veolia know how possible combinations of chemicals will react? Have combo-incineration procedures been piloted, observed and modified or is this theoretical?
-
What combustion products will be created during the burn? How will these products be contained or neutralized?
-
What toxic residues will remain after the burn? How will these residues be handled and disposed of? How will this disposal affect the bayous and local water quality for well owners?
-
Why did the Department of Defense abandon the original plan to use safer Super Critical Water Oxidation methods of VX toxin disposal? Incineration has always been considered a less preferable alternative for health and safety reasons.
-
Port Arthur was severely battered by Hurricane Rita in 2005. Have hurricane velocity winds, torrential rain and the possibility of a catastrophic storm surge been considered in designing Veolia’s storage area devoted to VX hydrolysate?
-
What measures has Veolia implemented to insure the health and safety of employees, nearby residents, and the ecosystem proximate to the incinerator facility?
-
Why did the Department of Defense/Veolia choose to violate the expressed stipulations of the Fiscal Year 2007 Defense Authorization Act (HR 5122)/Section 921: “…when selecting a site for treatment or disposal of neutralized chemical agent at a location remote from the location where the agent is stored, the Secretary of Defense should propose a credible process that seeks to gain the support of affected communities.” The public, in general, was excluded from access to information about this project, and no efforts were made to build broad-based support.
Submitted by John Sullivan, Co-Director: Public Forum & Toxics Assistance, Sealy Center for Environmental Health & Medicine/NIEHS Center in Environmental Toxicology
Editor's Note: On June 26, the U.S. Army agreed to suspend shipments of VX from Indiana to Texas while a federal court in Indiana reviews evidence in a lawsuit seeking to stop the shipments.
B. 2007 Healthy Schools Hero
Every year to mark the anniversary of the March 18, 1937 Texas school explosion, we salute a “Healthy Schools Hero” whose inspirational leadership protects children and teachers from school hazards and unhealthy school conditions.
The Healthy School Hero of the year is Diane Ethier, of Pomfret Center, Conn., because she is an environmental health resource and mentor to hundreds of people. In a variety of roles, she helps others to break the silence about school hazards and to overcome the pervasive denial and indifference about school conditions that lead to serious illness in schools. Her courage, her skill as a communicator and her persistence bring the lessons of the 1937 Texas school explosion to schools throughout Connecticut and far beyond. Important lessons learned are that every school needs a champion; someone who is a driving force to prioritize health and safety in schools. Ethier shows how grassroots organizations, professional associations and state and federal agencies can be allies that enable parents, teachers and school officials to speak up and take leadership for school safety. To read more about Diane Ethier's story, go to <http://www.healthy-kids.info/resourcesdetail.lasso?-skiprecords=45>
You too can be a hero and bring the lessons of the 1937 Texas school explosion <http://journal.rcn.net/Sentinellions> to your school. Find additional information and suggestions for school programs and events to improve school safety and health security especially for students with asthma, allergies and other environmentally triggered conditions at <http://www.healthy-kids.info>.
Submitted by Ellie Goldberg, MEd, <healthykids@rcn.com>
C. A Fair Farm Bill for Public Health
The 2007 Farm Bill will include numerous programs that impact public health. In a new installment of its Farm Bill series, the Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy explains how smarter policies could help curtail the proliferation of cheap unhealthy food, support local food systems that provide more fruits and vegetables, and increase access to healthy food through nutrition and food assistance programs.
You can read “A Fair Farm Bill for Public Health,” and five other papers in IATP's Farm Bill series at: <http://www.agobservatory.org/issue_farmbill2007.cfm> .
Submitted by David Wallinga, MD, Food and Health Program, Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy