Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter.
Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page 7
1
Introduction
The Blue Grass Chemical Agent-Destruction Pilot Plant (BGCAPP), under the
management of the Program Executive Officer for Assembled Chemical Weapons
Alternatives, is responsible for destroying the chemical weapons stockpile currently
being stored at the Blue Grass Army Depot (BGAD). BGCAPP and a facility being built
at the Pueblo Chemical Depot to dispose of the chemical agent stored there are parts of
the nation's effort to destroy its chemical agent stockpile in line with its obligations under
the Chemical Weapons Convention treaty. The stockpile stored at BGAD consists of 523
tons of mustard agent in projectiles and nerve agents GB and VX in projectiles and
rockets. The chemical agent loads in the weapons will be destroyed by chemical
neutralization.1 In the neutralization process, the munitions are disassembled, the agents
and energetic materials are separated, and the agents are neutralized with caustic (for GB,
VX, and energetic materials, such as bursters) or water (for mustard agent), producing
effluents called hydrolysates. The hydrolysates will be further treated with supercritical
water oxidation (SCWO), which uses water at very high temperature (1200oF) and
pressure (3,400 psi).
The rocket portion of the stockpile at BGAD consists of about 70,000 M55
rockets, manufactured in 19611965, that contain the cholinesterase-inhibiting nerve
agents GB and VX (CMA, 2008). Those agents are organophosphates that are capable of
binding the enzyme acetylcholinesterase, which breaks down the neurotransmitter
acetylcholine in the neural synapses. When acetylcholinesterase is inhibited, the
parasympathetic nervous system is overstimulated by excess acetylcholine, resulting in
potentially fatal cholinergic effects. GB is the more volatile of the two agents, and its
primary mode of exposure is through the respiratory system; VX is absorbed primarily
through skin. The two materials are toxic at very low concentrations. Table 1-1 lists time-
weighted average maximum recommended exposure levels for the agents. The short-term
exposure level (STEL) is designed to protect employees, and the general population limit
(GPL) is designed to protect the community at large. Safe-handling procedures for
chemical agent weapons are in Volume 6 of Department of the Army Pamphlet 38561
(U.S. Army, 2008).
The M55 rockets stored at BGAD will be disposed of in a manner entirely
different from that used at the other chemical agent disposal facilities that disposed of
M55 rockets. At the other facilities, an entire M55 rocket was cut into pieces and
processed through incinerators, but the rockets stored at BGAD will be processed as
follows. Pallets of M55 rockets will be transported from their BGAD storage igloos in an
enhanced on-site container (EONC), received in the unpack area, and monitored for the
1
The term hydrolysis is used in the chemical demilitarization program.
7
OCR for page 8
presence of chemical agent. If chemical agent is detected, the sealed EONC will be
opened in the explosive containment vestibule by workers in protective gear, who will
overpack any leaking or contaminated rockets; the remaining rockets will proceed to the
normal rocket destruction process. If no agent is detected, the rockets will be unpacked
from the EONC and placed into the automated rocket handling system (Schlatter, 2010).
From that point on, all operations to destroy the agent and warhead bodies will be
remotely controlled.
Table 1-1 Time-Weighted Average
Maximum Exposure Limits (µg/m3)
Time Basis GB VX
GPL 24 hours 0.001 0.0006
STEL 15 minutes 0.1 0.01
SOURCE: U.S Army, 2008.
Figure 1-1 is a basic depiction of an M55 rocket in its shipping and firing tube
(SFT) and where it will be cut during processing. Figure 1-2 shows a cutaway model of
an M55 rocket in flight configuration with fins deployed. The first step in processing the
rockets will be for the rocket cutting machine (which works by pressing a rolling blade
first against the SFT and then against the rocket body) to cut the fiberglass SFT into two
pieces. The forward piece of SFT covering the warhead will be removed, conveyed to the
motor shipping room, and placed in a crate. The rocket cutting machine will then make a
second cut at the threaded connection between the warhead and the rocket motor. The
intact warhead containing the chemical agent, burster, and fuze will be destroyed at
BGCAPP by neutralization followed by supercritical water oxidation, as discussed above.
Cut
Motor section Warhead
Cut
FIGURE 1-1 Simplified diagram of an M55 rocket in its shipping and firing tube, showing where the tube
and rocket will be cut. SOURCE: Ron Hawley, Plant General Manager, Bechtel Parsons Blue Grass Team,
"Rocket Processing," presentation to the committee, March 20, 2012.
FIGURE 1-2 Cutaway depiction of an M55 rocket in flight configuration with fins deployed. SOURCE:
Adapted from CMA, 2008.
The separated rear section of the M55 rocket--containing the M28 rocket
propellant, igniter, rocket nozzle, fins and other components--and the fore closure still in
8
OCR for page 9
its portion of the SFT will be loaded cut side up into a plywood shipping box designed to
hold 30 rocket motors. In this report, the term separated rocket motor will refer to the
separated rear section of the M55 rocket (see definition in Appendix A). Figure 1-3
shows a simplified layout of a separated rocket motor. Peak processing rates are projected
to be 20 GB-filled or 24 VX-filled M55 rockets per hour; the process will produce like
numbers of separated rocket motors each hour.2
The storage boxes containing the separated rocket motors will be placed into an
airlock, and the headspace above the motors will be monitored for the presence of any
chemical agent above the STEL before being released to the motor packing room and
later transportation and disposal. If any agent is detected, the individual separated rocket
motors will be manually monitored to determine which ones are contaminated with
chemical agent, and entire separated rocket motors that are contaminated will be
processed through BGCAPP. This report addresses only separated rocket motors that
have been monitored and cleared for disposal either on-site (on BGAD) or off-site (off
BGAD). The current plan is to dispose of separated rocket motors outside the BGCAPP
facility. The process for clearing the separated rocket motors has yet to be developed and
will, of course, need to be negotiated with the Kentucky Department for Environmental
Protection.
The BGCAPP facility currently under construction will have the capability of
demilitarizing and destroying an entire M55 rocket. Indeed, the original design of the
facility included the disposal of the entire M55 rocket in the facility with 18 energetic
batch hydrolyzers. As part of a cost-reduction initiative, a decision was made to eliminate
all but three of the energetic batch hydrolyzers and to dispose of the separated rocket
motors outside BGCAPP. The focus of this report is on the potential sites and
technologies that might be used to dispose of the separated rocket motors outside
BGCAPP. The options include treatment and disposal on-site or off-site at a commercial
or government facility.
Aft end cap Shipping and
with bail Rocket motor case Inhibitor layer M28 propellant grain
firing tube
Electric firing connect
Fin/nozzle assembly Anti-resonance rod Igniter Fore closure
for igniter
FIGURE 1-3 Simplified layout of a separated rocket motor showing its major components.
BGCAPP has identified the disposal of the separated rocket motors as a
potentially rate-limiting factor that could affect the overall rate of M55 rocket disposal at
BGCAPP. The main reason is related to storage space at BGCAPP. BGCAPP will have
about 1.25 days worth of storage space in the munitions demilitarization building for
2
Ron Hawley, plant general manager, Bechtel Parsons Blue Grass Team, "Rocket Processing,"
presentation to the committee, March 20, 2012.
9
OCR for page 10
separated rocket motors. Any interruption in transportation of rocket motors out of this
storage could force a slowing or cessation of M55 rocket processing operations at
BGCAPP. Options are needed to address issues of storage, throughput, transportation,
and the treatment that will be required to dispose of the roughly 3,350 separated rocket
motors that BGCAPP plans to generate each month.3
STATEMENT OF TASK
The National Research Council will establish an ad hoc committee to address
these specific tasks:
Investigate off-site and on-site alternative options for disposal of approximately
70,000 M55 rocket motors stored at Blue Grass Army Depot that are not
contaminated by chemical nerve agent contained in the rocket warheads
Review and examine the status of maturity and assess the likelihood of success for
each option
Consider the feasibility of recycling options for the propellant and rocket motor
components
Assess relevant environmental considerations, including those pertaining to the
health and safety of workers, and regulatory requirements such as those stemming
from applicable Kentucky Revised Statutes and RCRA regulations
Examine shipping considerations for implementation of off-site alternatives,
including packaging requirements
THE COMMITTEE, REPORT SCOPE, AND PROCESS
The committee is composed of persons who have extensive experience in solid
rockets, energetic materials, munitions disposal, hazardous wastes, safety, and public
involvement. Several committee members have expertise pertinent to the regulations
governing the transport and disposal of various types of munitions and associated
hazardous materials. Biographies of all the committee members are in Appendix D.
The committee met three times. The first meeting was held in Richmond,
Kentucky, and included a briefing from BGCAPP about the options that have been
reviewed for the treatment and disposal of the separated rocket motors and committee
discussions to begin framing the approach to the study and the report. The second
meeting was held in Washington, D.C. where the committee discussed and developed the
report draft. The third meeting was also held in Washington, D.C. At this meeting the
committee resolved most remaining issues and laid out the path to achieving committee
consensus on the report. Committee activities are summarized in Appendix C.
This report reviews various approaches that could be used for safe disposal of the
rocket motors separated from the M55 rockets stored at BGAD. It also discusses issues of
safety, storage, throughput, transportation of the separated rocket motors, on-site and off-
3
Kevin Regan, environmental manager, BGAPP project, "Rocket Motor (RM) Disposal," briefing
to the committee, March 20, 2012.
10
OCR for page 11
site disposal options, and how public acceptance could influence the disposal of the
separated rocket motors. The coverage of the report begins after the M55 rockets have
been cut and the separated rocket motors have been monitored and cleared for
transportation and disposal off-site.
OVERVIEW OF REPORT
Chapter 2 focuses on safety--energetics safety, electrical safety, and lead.
Although the chemical agent warheads will no longer be present when the separated
rocket motors are handled, the separated rocket motors are hazardous in their own right
because they contain M28 propellant, which has aged and degraded and will continue to
degrade. Explosives safety precautions are necessary in all handling and storage
operations that involve the separated rocket motors. Chapter 2 also addresses hazards of
electromagnetic radiation to ordnance and risks posed by electrostatic discharge if the
igniter leads and shunting are damaged when the rockets are cut.
Chapter 3 is an overview of technologies--primarily chemical and thermal
treatment methods--that could be used to dispose of the separated rocket motors. The
chapter presents information on both thermal treatment options (open and contained) and
chemical treatment options, such as base hydrolysis and supercritical water oxidation.
Recycling of the rocket motors is unlikely in that the M28 propellant is old and degraded
and contains lead. It would not be practical or cost-effective to reuse the propellant,
recover its ingredients, or work it into another form, such as fertilizer. In addition, the
SFTs contain polychlorinated biphenyls. The committee envisions that the separated
rocket motors will be removed from the SFTs before disposal of the motors, in part to
avoid the contamination of disposal waste streams with polychlorinated biphenyls; this is
discussed in more depth in Chapter 5. The discussion in Chapter 3 includes
recommendations of the technologies that may be best suited for disposal of the separated
rocket motors.
The storage of separated rocket motors is discussed in Chapter 4. The storage of
the separated rocket motors is a potentially limiting step in M55 rocket disposal at
BGCAPP, inasmuch as their disposal will probably proceed at a lower rate than the
rocket-cutting operations at BGCAPP. Although the storage of the separated rocket
motors is not an explicit item in the statement of task, it is central to the timely processing
of M55 rockets through BGCAPP. If the separated rocket motors cannot be transported to
a storage or disposal site outside BGCAPP at least as quickly as they are accumulated in
BGCAPP, rocket-cutting and warhead-processing operations at BGCAPP would need to
be slowed or halted.
Chapter 5 presents some of the specific issues that BGCAPP project management
will need to consider when selecting the most appropriate location for disposal of the
separated rocket motors. On-site disposal options reviewed by the committee include
open burning of the propellant grain at the BGAD permitted explosive hazardous-waste
treatment facility; using the D-100 detonation chamber currently operational at BGAD;
using alternative technologies, such as explosive destruction technologies, which can be
added to BGAD capabilities; and disposal at BGCAPP after completion of all chemical
agent destruction operations. Off-site disposal options, in which all the separated rocket
11
OCR for page 12
motors would be removed from BGCAPP and BGAD and delivered to other facilities for
disposal, are also discussed. The chapter considers transportation issues. For example, the
transportation of the separated rocket motors on public roads will need to comply with
Department of Transportation regulations and will require appropriate and specialized
packaging, whereas on-site transportation will have a different, and potentially less
demanding, regulatory framework.
The report contains two appendixes that supplement the committee's work in the
main body of the report. Appendix A sets forth some definitions that are used specifically
by this committee. Appendix B reviews the history of public sentiment as it pertains to
the committee's task. Although a consideration of public sentiment is not an explicit item
in the statement of task and a rigorous examination of it was beyond the committee's
scope, the committee believed that it would be remiss not to include some discussion of it
in that it is likely to figure into the ability to implement any given disposal technology or
disposal option. Programs for destroying the chemical munitions stockpile managed by
the U.S. Army Chemical Materials Agency4 and the Assembled Chemical Weapons
Alternatives5 program have historically been heavily influenced by public sentiment. The
concerns of citizens near BGAD, along potential transportation routes, and near potential
off-site disposal locations are therefore going to be important in consideration of any
decision about the choice of a technology or option (whether on-site or off-site) to
dispose of the separated rocket motors.
REFERENCES
CMA (Chemical Materials Agency). 2008. Fact Sheet: M55 Rockets, March 5. Available
online at http://www.cma.army.mil/fndocumentviewer.aspx?docid=003677976. Last
accessed July 5, 2012.
Schlatter, J. 2010. Blue Grass Exchange: Chemical Munitions Destruction: A Rocket's
Path Through the Pilot Plant Facility, April-June. Available online at https://www.
pmacwa.army.mil/info/bg_exchange_apr10_rocket_path.html. Last accessed July 5,
2012.
U.S. Army. 2008. Department of the Army Pamphlet 38561: Toxic Chemical Agent
Safety Standards, December 17. Available online at http://www.apd.army.mil/pdffiles
/p385_61.pdf. Last accessed June 7, 2012.
4
The U.S. Army Chemical Materials Agency has successfully and safely disposed of the chemical
agent and munitions stockpiles at Aberdeen, Maryland; Anniston, Alabama; Johnston Atoll; Newport,
Indiana; Pine Bluff, Arkansas; Tooele, Utah; and Umatilla, Oregon. Chemical neutralization was used to
dispose of bulk agent at Aberdeen, Maryland, and Newport, Indiana. Incineration was used to dispose of
the stockpiles at the other sites.
5
In addition to BGCAPP, a facility is under construction at the Pueblo Chemical Depot, in
Colorado, to dispose of the mustard agent stockpile there. The agent will be chemically neutralized by hot-
water hydrolysis, and the resulting hydrolysates will be processed through a biotreatment system.
12
