United States Government Publishing Office publisher pbl distributor dst United States Government Accountability Office National Security and International Affairs Division author aut Government Organization text government publication eng GAOREPORTS Legislative Agency Publications gao legislative 2010-08-12 U.S. Government Printing Office 1994-03-18 monographic deposited born digital GA 1.13:NSIAD-94-123 https://www.govinfo.gov/app/details/GAOREPORTS-NSIAD-94-123 P0b002ee18038bdc9 f:ns94123 DGPO 2010-08-12 2011-03-24 GAOREPORTS-NSIAD-94-123 machine generated eng fdlp REPORT GAOREPORTS-NSIAD-94-123 NSIAD-94-123 Chemical warfare Property disposal Army facilities Waste disposal Munitions Environmental impact statements Systems evaluation Cost analysis Technology transfer Research and development Anniston (AL) Army Chemical Munitions Stockpile Disposal Program Johnston Atoll Chemical Agent Disposal System GB Nerve Gas VX Nerve Gas Mustard Gas Aberdeen (MD) Pine Bluff (AR) Tooele (UT) Rocky Mountain Arsenal (CO) Chemical Weapons Convention Letter Report NSIAD The most feasible technological alternatives to the incineration of chemical weapons are in the initial stages of development and are more than a decade away from becoming fully operational. It is unlikely that any of these technologies will be ready in time to destroy the entire U.S. chemical weapons stockpile by the December 2204 deadline. Any of these alternative technologies could not, by itself, dispose of an entire chemical weapon. As a result, multiple technologies would have to be developed and tested. Because the alternative technologies are in the earliest stages of development, cost estimates are either nonexistent or unreliable. Similarly, their performance cannot be compared with that of incineration. GAO did, however, identify advantages and disadvantages to each technology. This report also discusses the operational safety of the Army's incineration facility on Johnston Atoll and the cryofracture process, which involves soaking munitions in liquid oxygen to make them brittle. The munitions are then crushed in a large hydraulic press before being incinerated. GAO summarized this report in testimony before Congress; see Chemical Weapons: Issues Involving Destruction Technologies, by David R. Warren, Associate Director for Defense Management and NASA Issues, before the Subcommittee on Nuclear Deterrence, Arms Control, and Defense Intelligence, Senate Committee on Armed Services. GAO/T-NSIAD-94-159, Apr. 26, 1994 (23 pages). https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/GAOREPORTS-NSIAD-94-123/html/GAOREPORTS-NSIAD-94-123.htm GAO/NSIAD-94-123 https://www.govinfo.gov/app/details/GAOREPORTS-NSIAD-94-123 Letter Report GAO/NSIAD-94-123; Chemical Weapons Destruction: Advantages and Disadvantages of Alternatives to Incineration; Chemical warfare Property disposal Army facilities Waste disposal Munitions Environmental impact statements Systems evaluation Cost analysis Technology transfer Research and development Anniston (AL) Army Chemical Munitions Stockpile Disposal Program Johnston Atoll Chemical Agent Disposal System GB Nerve Gas VX Nerve Gas Mustard Gas Aberdeen (MD) Pine Bluff (AR) Tooele (UT) Rocky Mountain Arsenal (CO) Chemical Weapons Convention Public Law 102-484