The rocket and delivery system for binary nerve gas are to be tested soon at Dugway Proving Ground, but the Army did little to involve the public in its environmental assessment.
Steve Erickson of the military watchdog group, Downwinders, noticed an obscure legal announcement in the Deseret News a month ago, which mentioned that the base intended to test the MLRS XM135 rocket binary chemical warhead. He began calling state officials to see if they had received copies of the environmental assessment on the test. They had not.In 1979, state officials and the military services signed a memorandum of understanding under which all environmental documents are to be sent to the state's Resource Development Coordinating Committee. Was the assessment about the nerve gas rocket tests sent to the RDCC?
"We have not heard about it, no," said John Harja, senior staff analyst for RDCC.
Asked how Dugway has performed in the past concerning notification, Harja said, "When they pay attention to what they're doing, they send us things, but every now and then this happens."
Dugway's public notice said there would be no significant environmental impact.
The purpose of the test is to find out what sorts of damage could occur to the MLRS rocket during storage, transportation and deployment. The missile is equipped with a binary chemical warhead and the mechanism to mix the chemicals.
The way a binary system works is that "precursor chemicals" are supposed to be relatively harmless by themselves. After the rocket is launched, a diaphragm between the chemicals bursts, and the new combination is deadly.
According to the notice, "The test to be conducted at Dugway Proving Ground will not produce lethal chemical agent." Under the Army's plan, one of the precursor chemicals called "A," will be used in the rocket warhead along with a simulant containing Nile blue dye. A separate test will use precursor "B," methylphosphonic difluorite, along with another simulant using blue dye.
These two kinds of tests will be carried out separately "and at remotely segregated sites in order to ensure that accidental production of nerve agent cannot occur," the notice says.
"Testing will be performed with large catchment pans under the test items to prevent spills." Rockets may explode during tests, so special precautions are planned.
"If sympathetic detonations do occur, any splattering of chemical simulants or precursors at the site will be cleaned up," it assures us.
Dugway spokesman Dick Whitaker said that if the precursor chemicals are not mixed, "it's a non-toxic chemical. There's no toxicity to them whatsoever."
The tests are scheduled to take place soon, Whitaker said. The legal notice ran for three days starting Feb. 27, and there was a public comment period of 30 days allowed after that. Erickson wants an extension of the comment period, given the assessment's poor distribution.
In addition, he objects to the fact that the Army casually dismisses the alternative of not carrying out the tests.
According to Dugway's notice, "Alternative C (not performing the tests) was rejected on the basis (that) the proposed action is in the interest of national security and the overall quality of our environment. The action is required to obtain data on the MLRS Binary Chemical Warhead rocket vulnerabilities and hazardous characteristics."
National security. How many times has that catch phrase been used as an excuse for something that might not really be in the country's interests?
International law bans the first use of chemical weapons. Their existence threatens world peace, as Iraq demonstrates. A military establishment as big and varied as ours has no need for them.
In an ideal world, Dugway's environmental assessment would receive widespread publication and comment, and the government would conclude that Alternative C is preferable. The tests wouldn't be carried out.
But as a minimum in our imperfect society, Dugway should have touched bases with state officials and promoted a much better discussion of this important issue.