Army tackles $1.3B task to demolish incinerators
ANNISTON, Ala. — The Pentagon spent $10.2 billion over three decades burning tons of deadly nerve gas and other chemical weapons stored in four states — some of the agents so deadly that even a few drops can kill.
Now with all those chemicals up in smoke and communities freed of a threat, the Army is in the middle of another, $1.3 billion project: demolishing the incinerators that destroyed the toxic materials.
In Alabama, Oregon, Utah and Arkansas, crews are tearing apart multibillion-dollar incinerators or working to draw the curtain on a drama that began in the Cold War, when the United States and the former Soviet Union stockpiled millions of pounds of chemical weapons.
Construction work continues at two other sites where technology other than incineration will be used to neutralize agents chemically, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
At the incinerator complex at the Anniston Army Depot — where sarin, VX nerve gas and mustard gas were stored about 55 miles east of Birmingham — the military said last week that it's about one-third of the way into a $310 million program to level a gigantic furnace that cost $2.4 billion to build and operate.
Tim Garrett, the government site project manager, said officials considered other uses for the incinerator, but the facility was too specialized to convert. The law originally allowing chemical incineration required demolition once the work was done.
The military said the incineration program cost $11.5 billion in all, with the cost of tearing down the four facilities included from the start.
While opponents of the incinerators predicted dire consequences and the possibility of floating clouds of nerve gas in the event of an accident, the CDC said no nearby residents were exposed to or harmed by chemical agents.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- Judge orders W.Va. agency to release pollution data
- Man caught jumping White House fence
- West Virginia University warns students over riots
- 8 arrested in post-game riots in Morgantown
- Alleged trooper killer may have been seen Friday
- Academic scandal at University of North Carolina bigger than previously reported
- Chinese hackers busy, FBI warns
- Immigration work permits could rise under contract
- Coburn’s final ‘Wastebook’ tallies $25B in what he considers ‘pork’
- Coast Guard to seek billions to protect Arctic interests
- Security at Capitol questioned