1996 CPEO Military List Archive

From: Lenny Siegel <lsiegel@igc.org>
Date: Fri, 24 May 1996 16:52:18 -0700 (PDT)
Reply: cpeo-military
Subject: BANG BOX
 
From: Lenny Siegel <lsiegel@igc.org>

BANG BOX
One of the Army's principal tools in justifying the open burning and 
detonation (OB/OD) of munitions and rockets has been the Bang Box, an 
inflatable 1000 cubic meter test chamber located at the Dugway Proving 
Ground in Utah. Formally, it is known as the Propellant, Explosive, and 
Pyrotechnic Thermal Treatment Evaluation and Test Facility. 
Instruments inside the Bang Box measure emissions from detonations and 
burns. Based upon a series of tests, the Army has concluded: "volatile 
and semivolatile organic compounds resulting from OB/OD of propellants, 
explosives, and energetic munitions are proving to be far below levels 
of environmental concern and do not pose a threat to health or the 
environment."
The tests appear to be carried out in good faith. The Army has worked 
closely with U.S. EPA. Bang Box data has been correlated with data from 
field tests.
But I find the conclusions counter-intuitive. The uncontrolled 
combustion of significant quantities of toxic substances must release 
significant quantities of toxic substances into the environment.
When I originally read some of the bang box technical reports, I 
offered some general criticisms. But in reading some newer papers about 
the program, I am struck by a key fact that escaped me before:
The Bang Box can test only 227 grams of bare explosives or 2.27 
kilograms of bare propellants. It is quite conceivable that a small 
amount of pure material - that is, with no shell or casing - burns much 
better in the lab than during bulk disposal in the field. In fact, 
there have been reports that open detonations of waste munitions have 
actually thrown intact live munitions away from burn areas.
I am sure that the proponents of OB/OD, who write confidently about the 
Bang Box results, believe that skepticism such as mine places a 
difficult burden of proof upon the Army. However, I believe that the 
potential risks are so great that this is exactly the type of activity 
that should be forced to prove itself, beyond a shadow of a doubt, 
before receiving permits.
Lenny Siegel

  Prev by Date: Documents on Disk
Next by Date: NAVAL WASTE
  Prev by Thread: Documents on Disk
Next by Thread: NAVAL WASTE

CPEO Home
CPEO Lists
Author Index
Date Index
Thread Index