Report Details Significant Cancer and Other Health Risks to Humans;
Oregon DEQ Wants to Stay the Course
(Washington, D.C) – Tomorrow morning, June 19, in Medford, Oregon, the Oregon Environmental Quality Commission (EQC) will meet to discuss and decide critical issues regarding the operation of the Army’s chemical warfare agent incineration operation at the Umatilla Chemical Depot (UCD). The Commission will vote on whether to approve the “post-trial burn risk assessment,” a report commissioned by the DEQ showing that cancer and other health risks to humans posed by chemical agent incineration are significant and exceed Oregon risk standards. Another key issue to be covered is the determination of the “best available technology” to dispose of secondary wastes (e.g., carbon filter material, protective suits, etc.) that are produced during the incineration of chemical agents at UCD.
“Although it is flawed, the state’s risk assessment details how burning these agents is an unacceptable risk to public health and the environment,” stated Richard Condit, Senior Counsel of the Government Accountability Project (GAP). “Members of the commission will need to make clear to the public why they are authorizing continued operation and certifying that the incineration of secondary wastes is the best technology, when the risk assessment indicates that incineration will likely pose unacceptable cancer and other health risks to the public.”
The ‘post-trial burn risk assessment’ was strongly influenced by the Army, the operator of UCD, and contractor Ecology & Environment, which was hired by the DEQ. The executive summary of the risk assessment acknowledges that cancer and non-cancer risks exceed the risk-based thresholds established for protection of human health. Additionally, the assessment also indicates that the incineration of chemical warfare agents and related wastes may present an unacceptable risk to wildlife and the environment. For example, the hazard estimate for numerous wildlife, including Blue Heron, Mallard Duck, Raccoon, Owl, Spotted Sandpiper, Mourning Dove, and Western Meadowlark, exceed risk standards.
This risk assessment is the second of a two-part process. The first, a ‘pre-trial burn risk assessment’ was purely based on estimates and produced in 1997, prior to any incineration, which began in 2004. Now, this latest risk assessment, which utilizes actual test data from burning surrogate wastes, shows that the first report may have underestimated the risk to humans and the environment from burning chemical warfare agents.
Approval of the risk assessment would indicate that the Commission believes that continued incineration of chemical warfare agents and other wastes at UCD are safe and meets Oregon legal standards. The EQC is also set to publicly discuss, and decide, on the selection of ‘best available technology’ for the disposal of secondary wastes.
Best Available Technology
GAP attorneys, on behalf of G.A.S.P., Oregon Wildlife Federation, the Sierra Club and local residents, filed a lawsuit in Oregon against the EQC and DEQ last November, seeking a moratorium on burning secondary wastes and mustard agent at Umatilla, on the grounds that the agencies failed to follow Oregon law. State law is unique in demanding that the method of chemical agent disposal be the “best available technology” for doing so. Alternative technologies to incineration and secondary waste disposal that release significantly less contaminants have been developed for and will be used at the Army’s Blue Grass (Kentucky) and Pueblo (Colorado) facilities. In recent years, the Aberdeen Proving Ground facility in Maryland destroyed 1,800 tons of mustard agent by a chemical “neutralization” method, which greatly reduces the emission of hazardous chemicals into the environment.
“How the EQC decides to address the negative findings of this new assessment, and what they decide on regarding the “best available technology” for the treatment of secondary wastes will significantly impact public health and the environment in Eastern Oregon and Washington,” stated Condit.
Furthermore, review of the risk assessment reveals that it is flawed in several significant respects. For example, the risk assessment fails to fully address how the emissions could affect small children or developing fetuses. A number of chemicals released by the UCD in the incineration process, such as lead, mercury, and PCB’s, can cause irreversible neurological damage.
DEQ’s Push for Incineration
Despite the palpable risks, the DEQ wants to stay the course on the incineration of secondary wastes. According to a DEQ Best Available Technology Staff Report, the DEQ recommends to the EQC:
…incineration in the metal parts furnace and/or deactivation furnace system represents the best available technology for treatment of agent-contaminated wastes originally destined for treatment in the dunnage incinerator.
However, the DEQ technology assessment fails to address the risks and benefits of each alternative option. In addition, the DEQ has failed to address the opportunities to treat individual components of the secondary waste stream. For example, the best method(s) to decontaminate used carbon filter material may be quite different from the best method(s) used to treat or dispose of contaminated wood pallets or metal parts. The DEQ’s approach supports the Army’s desire to maintain the status quo, but fails to establish the best technologies for treating the various components of the secondary waste stream.
The commission is set to meet at 8:30 a.m. tomorrow morning at the Rogue Regency Inn in Medford. An EQC “town hall” style meeting which invites public participation and dialogue is also scheduled from 7:00 – 9:00 p.m. that evening.