Lettera di Chuck Hagel a Rick Jordan

Lettera di Chuck Hagel a Rick Jordan


Messaggio del Segretario Hagel all' equipaggio della M / V Capo Ray

Per il capitano Jordan e l'equipaggio della MV Capo Ray :

Tutta l'America vi augura bene durante i preparativi di una partenza per una missione storica .

State per realizzare qualcosa che nessuno ha provato . 
Distruggerete, in mare , una delle più grandi riserve mondiali di armi chimiche, contribuendo così a rendere un mondo più sicuro .

Come tutti sapete, il vostro compito non sarà facile . Le vostre giornate saranno lunghe e rigorose . Ma il vostro duro lavoro , la preparazione e la dedizione faranno la differenza .

Siete pronti . Tutti noi abbiamo piena fiducia in ciascuno di voi . 

Voi rappresentate il meglio della nostra nazione , non solo a causa della vostra competenza e impegno , ma a causa della vostra volontà di servire, quando richiesto . 

Per questo, saremo sempre grati . Siamo anche grati per le vostre famiglie per l'amore e il sostegno che hanno dato a voi.

A nome del nostro paese e del popolo americano, vi auguro molto successo. 

Abbiate cura di voi stessi.  Dio vi benedica tutti .

Cordiali saluti ,

Chuck Hagel
Segretario della Difesa



English

Release No: NR-053-14
January 27, 2014

Secretary Hagel Message to the Crew of the M/V Cape Ray

To Captain Jordan and the crew of the MV Cape Ray:

All of America wishes you well as you prepare to depart on your historic mission.

You are about to accomplish something no one has tried. 
You will be destroying, at sea, one of the world's largest stockpiles of chemical weapons and helping make a safer world.

As you all know, your task will not be easy. Your days will be long and rigorous. But your hard work, preparation and dedication will make the difference.

You are ready. We all have complete confidence in each of you. 

You represent the best of our nation, not only because of your expertise and commitment, but because of your willingness to serve when called upon. 

For that, we will always be grateful. We are also grateful to your families for the love and support they have given you.

On behalf of our country and the American people, I wish you much success. 

Take care of yourselves. God Bless you all.

Sincerely,

Chuck Hagel
Secretary of Defense


Link:

http://www.defense.gov/releases/release.aspx?releaseid=16509

Cape Ray compie 38 anni !

Perché viene utilizzata la nave Cape Ray (costruita nel 1977 e privo di doppio scafo), per neutralizzare e trasportare armi chimiche, in una operazione militare che é stata definita come una "missione storica" .

>>> Leggi ancora...

64 Esperti Chimici

Il porto di Gioia rappresenterà soltanto un punto di transizione dal quale transiterà la nave contenente i rifiuti. 

Dopo il passaggio sulla Cape Ray, gli agenti chimici saranno distrutti in acque internazionali, mediante idrolisi a bordo della nave stessa, equipaggiata con due appositi impianti e sulla quale viaggeranno 35 marine e 64 esperti chimici dell’Army’s Edgewood Chemical Biological Center. 

La Germania smaltirà 370 tonnellate di scorie prodotte dallo stesso procedimento di distruzione eseguito sulla Cape Ray. 

La Gran Bretagna distruggerà a sua volta altre 150 tonnellate di agenti chimici della categoria più pericolosa sul proprio territorio. 

Nessuna sostanza tossica verrà gettata in mare, ha garantito Uzumcu, spiegando che è proibito dalla Convenzione sulle armi chimiche e che ispettori Opac saranno a bordo della Cape Ray per tutto il tempo dell’operazione”. 

Questa è la prima volta che verrà smaltito un arsenale di armi chimiche nel Mediterraneo. 

Link:

http://www.alboscuole.it/Articoli.aspx?cod=f0w4ax0404w1b2dd1614y2b2qe2824d3i4be3132l4a3dd4744-90944

Sea Based Destruction Ship

Read >>>

http://www.the-trench.org/sea-based-destruction-of-syrias-cw-proposed/

500 Militari

Mentre il “Wall Street Journal” citando fonti del Pentagono, svela che la Cape ray è stata varata nel 1977 e mai utilizzata per operazioni di questo calibro: inoltre non è provvista di doppio scafo per cui necessiterebbe di operazioni di rinforzo per dotarla di comparti stagni, al fine di evitare la pericolosa fuoriuscita dei materiali chimici.

Alcune fonti giornalistiche dicono che “ il carico da trasbordare da nave a nave senza sbarco a terra e senza stoccaggio è costituito da circa 60 contenitori da 20 piedi contenenti merci pericolose appartenenti alla classe 6.1 (materie tossiche), classificate in base al Codice Internazionale.

Si tratta di materiale appartenente alla medesima classe di materie tossiche trattate in via ordinaria nel porto di Gioia Tauro”. Dunque, la motivazione principale sulla scelta del porto calabrese sta nella similitudine dei veleni trattati, nello specifico si tratta, come definito dalla portavoce della missione Opac, Sigrid Kaag, di due tipologie di agenti, denominati: Chemical One, ovvero, la parte più pericolosa del carico poiché consistente in armi finite, che saranno dirette in Gran Bretagna dopo la transizione dalla nave danese a quella americana, ed il Chemical Two, il lotto che giungerà sul suolo calabro, le sostanze chimiche sono separate dagli inneschi per cui una parte verrà smaltita in mare, la pirite, il composto principale, verrà sigillata in appositi contenitori e gettata in acqua.

Ed è proprio in Germania, che le sostanze smaltite giungeranno per diventare prodotti industriali utilizzabili come fertilizzanti per le colture OGM. Nel porto arriveranno 500 militari, ma se l’operazione è simile alle altre già effettuate nel porto, che bisogno c’è di operai specializzati ed esercito? Nonostante, Letta, rassicuri sulla conformità delle operazioni alle norme internazionali, noi non possiamo che evidenziare come un’altra città del Sud venga denigrata ed umiliata, usata come discarica quotidianamente, ed ignorata per le decisioni più importanti.

Sperare non basta.

Sperare Non Basta .

La sperimentazione del primo laboratorio chimico navigante al mondo avverrà nel Porto di Gioia Tauro.

La MV Cape Ray é partita dagli USA e arriverà nelle prossime settimane nel Porto di Gioia Tauro. 

Tutto il mondo sta osservando questa "missione storica".

Nessun cenno ad eventuali problemi ambientali e/o di sicurezza.

Si sta realizzando uno scenario che neanche il miglior scrittore di fantapolitica avrebbe potuto concepire. 

Un territorio utilizzato come laboratorio.

Non basta sperare che tutto vada bene.

Perché esporre i nostri figli ai rischi di un esperimento militare 
che viene effettuato per la prima volta al mondo ?

Chi ha deciso per loro ?

Perché la popolazione locale é allarmata ?  

In questa operazione la popolazione locale non ha ricevuta una campagna informativa esaustiva.

Meglio dire che non ha proprio ricevuta alcun tipo di informazione.

Non sempre la mancanza totale di informazioni tecnico scientifiche é giustificata dalla natura delle operazioni stesse, in questo caso di natura militare.

Le autorità non sono obbligate a dare informazioni quando trattasi di operazioni militari che avvengono all'interno di campi militari o di zone delimitate che appartengono alla tipologia militare.

Ma quando si tratta di operazioni che vengono effettuate lungo una costa balneare e in zone civili/commerciali come il Porto di Gioia Tauro, la priorità doveva essere quella di divulgare il più velocemente possibile tutte le necessarie informazioni e notizie alla popolazione locale, per evitare un vuoto e una lacuna di conoscenza che facilmente può essere strumentalizzata e manipolata da altri interessi esterni.

La popolazione locale é allarmata perché non é in possesso della necessaria informazione per capire cosa sta accadendo nel suo territorio e nell'ambiente che la circonda.

Bisogna dare le notizie corrette e le necessarie spiegazioni per tranquilizzare gli abitanti del posto.

Inoltre, bisogna informare le persone di eventuali rischi che potrebbero derivare da simili operazioni.

Infine, bisogna anche spiegare il processo decisionale che ha determinato una simile scelta.

Senza questi elementi gli abitanti della Piana di Gioia Tauro hanno tutte le ragioni di questo mondo per rimanere allarmati.

Non sembra normale vedere qui nel Porto di Gioia Tauro un dispiegamento di forze militari e non governative per una operazione che viene definita di "routine" e di normale amministrazione.

Abbiamo sopportato tanto. Ma adesso é troppo.

Missione Storica

 Italian

(1)
Il Segretario della Difesa Chuck Hagel ha inviato una lettera al capitano Rick Jordan e l'equipaggio dei 135 membri dicendo loro che stavano imbarcando su una "missione storica". 
 

US ship heads out to destroy Syrian weapons

 English

US ship heads out to destroy Syrian weapons

US ship heads out to destroy Syrian weapons

A specially-equipped US naval ship departed for Italy on Monday on a ground-breaking mission to destroy Syria's most dangerous chemical agents, Pentagon officials said. 

After setting off from the port of Norfolk on the Virginia coast at 7:30 pm EST (0030 GMT Tuesday), the MV Cape Ray is
due to arrive in the southern port of Gioia Tauro in about "two to three weeks," spokesman Colonel Steven Warren told reporters.

The 650-foot (197.5 meter) cargo ship has been outfitted with two large portable hydrolysis systems designed to neutralize lethal chemical agents in Syria's arsenal.

(1)
Defence secretary Chuck Hagel sent a letter to Captain Rick Jordan and the 135-member crew telling them they were embarking on a "historic mission."

"You are about to accomplish something no one has tried," Hagel wrote in the letter released by the defence department.

 "You will be destroying at sea one of the world's largest stockpiles of chemical weapons and helping make a safer world," he wrote.

The Cape Ray was initially supposed to head out earlier on Monday but engine problems delayed the scheduled departure, officials said.

The ship has a crew of 35 civilians operating the vessel and will have a 63-member team in charge of the hydrolysis units as well as a security force on board.

The hydrolysis machines will mix heated water and other chemicals to break down the lethal agents, resulting in a sludge equivalent to industrial toxic waste.

Last year, the UN Security Council last year backed a US-Russian deal to remove and destroy Syria's chemical arsenal.

The agreement was brokered as a way to avert US missile strikes that Washington threatened after a chemical attack near Damascus, which Washington and other Western governments blamed on the regime.

Under the accord, Syria's entire chemical arsenal is to be eliminated by June 30.

The arrangement will see some of the most dangerous agents neutralized on the US ship at sea, as no country was ready to host an operation to destroy the chemicals.

The chemicals will be loaded on to the Cape Ray at the Italian port and then taken to an undisclosed location for destruction. The Pentagon stressed the ship's work was not an environmental cause for alarm.

"No hydrolysis byproducts will be released into the sea or air.  M/V Cape Ray will comply with all applicable international laws, regulations, and treaties," a spokesman said.

The materials are the deadliest in Syria's 1,290-tonne declared arsenal and include mustard gas and the ingredients for the nerve agents sarin and VX.

The destruction of the chemicals could take between 45 to 90 days, according to the Pentagon.

US ship heads out to destroy Syrian weapons

Link:

http://www.hindustantimes.com/world-news/us-ship-heads-out-to-destroy-syrian-chemical-weapons/article1-1177398.aspx

Problemi al motore della nave Cape Ray

Italian

(1)
WASHINGTON - Una nave da carico statunitense prevista per salpare Lunedi in una missione per distruggere decine di contenitori di armi chimiche letali essere rimossi dalla Siria è stata ritardata da problemi al motore.

English

US ship held up en route to Syria chemical weapons mission

Gennaio Lunedì 27 2014

Raw materials for making sarin and mustard gas are to be destroyed on board the MV Cape Ray.

(1)

WASHINGTON — A US cargo ship scheduled to set sail Monday on a mission to destroy dozens of containers of deadly chemical weapons being removed from Syria was delayed by engine problems. 

But defense officials said they still are hoping the MV Cape Ray, which is loaded with sophisticated equipment, will leave soon for the roughly two-week trip across the Atlantic and into the Mediterranean Sea. It was delayed when there was an electrical problem with one of the ship’s two main engines.

The Cape Ray is headed to the Italian port of Gioia Tauro, where the Syrian chemicals will be transferred to the ship. The chemicals include raw materials for making sarin and mustard gas and they will be destroyed on board the Cape Ray at sea.

On Monday, a second shipment of chemical weapons was loaded onto Danish and Norwegian ships at the port of Latakia in Syria, according to a statement from the UN and the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons. The ships are expected to stay in international waters off Syria waiting for additional loads.

Security challenges in Syria have slowed the transport of the materials to the port there where they are then loaded onto the ships. The Danish and Norwegian cargo vessels will transfer the chemicals onto the Cape Ray at the Gioia Tauro port.

Officials have said that about 700 tons of chemical weapons will be destroyed.

The 648-foot (197-meter) Cape Ray is carrying two massive machines, called field deployable hydrolysis systems, which will mix the chemicals with heated water and other chemicals to break down the toxic weapons in a titanium reactor, making them inert.

The Cape Ray belongs to the Department of Transportation’s Maritime Administration, but control of the ship transferred to the US Navy’s sealift command Monday morning. Col. Steve Warren, a Pentagon spokesman, said Monday that there is a crew of about 35 civilian mariners on the ship and some technical experts. More than 60 experts needed to operate the hydrolysis machines as well as other security and support staff are expected to be on the ship for the eventual chemical transfer. Most of those will board the Cape Ray at a later date.

The confirmed use of chemical weapons in the Damascus suburb of Ghouta on August 21, in which the US government said 1,400 people died, prompted a US-Russian agreement to eliminate Syria’s chemical weapons by mid-2014.

In a message to the crew Monday, Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel called the mission historic and noted that, “Your task will not be easy. Your days will be long and rigorous. But your hard work, preparation, and dedication will make the difference.”

Link:

http://www.timesofisrael.com/us-ship-held-up-en-route-to-syria-chemical-weapons-mission/

 

In caso di successo...

Italian

(1)
In caso di successo, l'operazione segnerebbe la prima volta che la neutralizzazione di agenti di guerra chimica è stata condotta in mare, secondo i funzionari degli Stati Uniti.



English

US ship assigned to destroy Syria's chemical weapons set to depart within two weeks

Key Points

• Cape Ray is equipped with two FDHS
• The ship is expected to neutralise 700 metric tonnes of bulk liquid chemical agents during its 90-day mission

The US cargo ship equipped with a system to destroy a portion of Syria's chemical weapon stockpile is making preparations to depart on its assignment by mid-January, Department of Defense (DoD) and Department of Transportation (DoT) officials said on 2 January.
"The departure will depend upon a number of factors, but we expect within about two weeks the ship to depart," Frank Kendall, the Pentagon's top acquisition official, told reporters during a briefing in Portsmouth, Virginia, where the US Ready Reserve Force vessel MV Cape Ray (T-AKR 9679) is being readied to support a UN mission to destroy Syria's chemical weapons.
Equipped with two Field Deployable Hydrolysis Systems (FDHS), Cape Ray is expected to eliminate about 700 metric tonnes of chemical warfare materiel from Syria. The bulk liquid stores of mustard gas and Sarin components will be transported from the civil war-torn country on board Norwegian and Danish ships to an exchange site in the Mediterranean Sea, possibly in Italy, where Cape Ray is expected to take on the shipment of chemicals for neutralisation.

An environmental enclosure installed on board the Cape Ray houses the FDHS that is designed to destroy bulk liquid chemical warfare agents, including mustard gas and precursors to Sarin.

 

Kendall said that the transfer details are still being determined but that the exchange would be "a fairly short two-day operation".
Officials are expecting the chemicals to be transferred to Cape Ray in approximately 280 standard ISO tank containers, each with a capacity of 6,600 gallons (24,983 litres). Once on board, the US team expects to neutralise the chemicals within 90 days, officials said.

"The actual time we'll have to operate the systems is about 45 days, but we're allowing 90 days of time because we may not be able to operate all the time," said Kendall.

(1)
If successful, the operation would mark the first time that the neutralisation of chemical warfare agents has been conducted at sea, according to US officials.

Standing in front of Cape Ray , a 197 m long roll-on/roll-off vessel under the purview of the DoT's Maritime Administration, Kendall said that the portable hydrolysis system has undergone shipboard testing and would proceed through additional sea trials in the coming days.

The 1,000-litre bulk storage tank, part of the FDHS installed on board Cape Ray, will assist in neutralising Syria's chemical weapons.

 

Acquired for about USD5 million per system, the FDHS employs technology and neutralisation processes that have been used to destroy US chemical weapons. By heating the chemical warfare agents and mixing them with reagents including water, sodium hydroxide, and sodium hypochlorite, the compounds are chemically neutralised and are rendered into hazardous waste that can be disposed commercially.
Officials said that they expect the FDHS to convert the 700 metric tonnes of mustard gas and DF compound - a precursor to the nerve gas Sarin - into 1.5 million gallons of liquid effluent. The waste liquid will be further treated so that it has a caustic property similar to that of household cleaners. That hazardous waste will then be disposed of by commercial means, which are yet to be determined by the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW), which is overseeing the destruction of Syria's stockpile.
A team of approximately 63 civilian personnel from the US Army's Edgewood Chemical Biological Center (ECBC) at Aberdeen Proving Ground, Maryland, will oversee the operation on board Cape Ray . According to Rob Malone, an environmental engineer representing the Joint Project Manager for Elimination, part of DoD's Joint Program Executive Office for Chemical and Biological Defense, the intent is to operate the two FDHS concurrently around the clock, with a pause every seventh day for maintenance and repairs on the systems.
"This is something we know how to do, and that team which will be operating the machines essentially knows exactly how to do that, and we're confident we'll do a very capable job," said Kendall, whose office helped to fund the rapid acquisition of the systems.

In February 2013 the ECBC was funded to design, assemble, and test the FDHS. Adam Baker, a chemical engineer from the ECBC, said the team decided to employ technologies that have been used to neutralise chemicals at various sites in the United States. At Aberdeen's demilitarisation facility, for example, US teams have neutralised 1,800-tonne containers of mustard gas. At a facility at Pine Bluff Arsenal in Arkansas, a different process has been used to neutralise the DF compound.
"Based on the short timeline, we had to use this established chemistry and copy those systems as much as possible and just scale them down into a transportable form," said Baker.
The first FDHS was demonstrated on 27 June 2013 and was handed over in July 2013. Installation of the two systems on board Cape Ray commenced in late November 2013, followed by the ship's first operational test in late December 2013, Malone told reporters during a tour of the FDHS.
With the FDHS running inside an environmental enclosure on Cape Ray 's cavernous main trailer deck, the chemical warfare agents will be processed in batches. The batch size for mustard gas is about 130 gallons, which takes two hours to process, said Malone.
What concerns officials the most is not the neutralisation technology, but rather the weather that the ship may encounter during its mission. Cape Ray 's captain, Rick Jordan, expressed confidence in the ship's handling capabilities.
"This ship has Gyrofin stabilisers which we can rig out, so when - if it's rolling quite a bit, that'll dampen the roll," Jordan said.
With a crew of 35 merchant mariners - six more than normal, to assist with services for the passengers - Cape Ray will host a total of 138 personnel, to include a military security team and additional support from US European Command.
Built by Japan's Kawasaki Heavy Industries in 1977, Cape Ray is one of 46 US Ready Reserve Force vessels that transport equipment and supplies for the DoD - it helped to transport military ground equipment to Afghanistan, for example. Ready Reserve Force ships also are employed by the Maritime Administration to help train law enforcement and local officials in the shipboard environment. They also have been deployed for humanitarian assistance and natural disaster relief efforts, such as Hurricanes Katrina and Rita as well as Superstorm Sandy.


 Link:

http://www.janes.com/article/32051/us-ship-assigned-to-destroy-syria-s-chemical-weapons-set-to-depart-within-two-weeks

Cape Ray - Data 2014 Gennaio 29 - Ora Italiana 13:00

La nave Cape Ray é partita.

La nave Cape Ray é partita dal porto USA -  Virginia - Norfolk

Data 2014 Gennaio 28  -  Ora Italiana  18:30

Cape Ray - Photo

La nave Cape Ray oggi. 

Qui sotto la nave Cape Ray quando si chiamava Seaspeed Asia nel 1981 .

OPCW - Gioia Tauro

Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons

Trans-loading of Syrian Chemicals to be Undertaken at Port of Gioia Tauro in Italy

The OPCW Director-General, Ambassador Ahmet Üzümcü, confirmed today that the Italian Government has agreed to allow the port of Gioia Tauro for priority chemicals brought from Syria by cargo vessels to be trans-loaded onto a U.S. ship, the MV Cape Ray. The port is located on the Mediterranean coast of southern Italy and is specialised in transhipment activities.

The Cape Ray has been out-fitted with two hydrolysis units which will neutralise some 560 metric tonnes of priority chemicals while the vessel is at sea in international waters.

Trans-loading the chemicals onto the Cape Ray in a port facility will greatly improve the safety and security of the operation.

The Director-General made the announcement in Rome following a special hearing that he addressed in the Italian Parliament on the Syria maritime mission. During a briefing with journalists, he restated his confidence that the mid-2014 deadline for eliminating Syria’s entire chemical arsenal can still be met.

“On behalf of the OPCW I wish to thank Italy for its generous contribution in making an Italian port available for trans-loading Syrian chemicals,” the Director-General said. “This comes on top of a € 3 million contribution by Italy to the OPCW’s Syria Trust Fund, and the provision of a military aircraft to transport the first team of OPCW inspectors to Syria. These contributions exemplify the spirit of cooperation underpinning the vitally important international effort to rid Syria of chemical weapons.”



Link:

http://www.opcw.org/news/article/trans-loading-of-syrian-chemicals-to-be-undertaken-at-port-of-gioia-tuaro-in-italy/

FDHS installato sulla nave Cape Ray

 Il sistema FDHS si trova sulla nave Cape Ray

 

FDHS - Frank Kendall Speech

English

Presenters: Bryan Whitman, Department of Defense Spokesman; Frank Kendall, Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics; Paul Jaenichen, Acting U.S. Maritime Administrator; Captain Rick Jordan; Robert Malone; Adam Baker
January 02, 2014

BRYAN WHITMAN:  Well, welcome, and thank you for attending today's media availability aboard Cape Ray.  My name is Bryan Whitman.  I'm the principal deputy for public affairs in the Defense Department.  It is -- we appreciate the fact that you had to do some planning over the holidays in order to be here, and we appreciate you taking the time to be out here for what is really an historic and important mission that will be taking place.

 

We know that there are many aspects to this story.  There are stories of international cooperation, cooperation across the U.S. government, diplomatic issues, and we are prepared to address all of those issues back in Washington and with you as you do other stories.  Today's focus, though, is on the science of neutralization, the technology of hydrolysis, and the capability that the United States is offering up to destroy chemical weapons.

 

So as we go through the question and answers today, and as you get an opportunity to photograph some of the equipment aboard the ship, I would just remind you that today's focus really is on the technology and this capability.

 

But before we get into the details of that, I would like to introduce a couple of people to you that will have some -- some comments to make.  The first, Mr. Frank Kendall, who is the undersecretary of defense for acquisition, technology and logistics.  Among his very broad portfolio, he has oversight of the department's nuclear, chemical and biological programs.  He has more than 40 years of experience in engineering and acquisition and national security. 

 

He'll also be joined today by Mr. Paul Jaenichen.  Mr. Jaenichen is the acting U.S. maritime administrator and the president's nominee to be the administrator.  He has -- a naval officer of 30 years with experience on submarines.  We also have -- once they finish, going into the more technical aspects for you, we will have, first, the ship's captain, Captain Rick Jordan, and Robert Malone, who is a subject matter expert and a very impressive career in chemical agent operations.  And joining him, his colleague, Adam Baker.

 

So without taking up any more time, I'd like to introduce Mr. Frank Kendall and Mr. Paul Jaenichen.

 

UNDER SECRETARY FRANK KENDALL:  Well, good morning.  Or good afternoon, I guess it is now.  Thank you for being with us today.  I'm just going to take a few minutes and say -- touch on a few topics.  I know you're anxious to see the ship and to see the hydrolysis units that we've been assembling here.

 

But before you do that, I want to mention a few things that I think are important in this effort and worth noting.  The first one is the paramount concern for safety that we have.  I know that's something that everybody has some obvious concerns about.  We're going to be handling and dealing with very hazardous materials on this ship.  Safety is our first order of business, and I think as you go through this today, talk to the people directly involved and ask your questions, you'll find out that an enormous amount of effort's been put into that aspect of what we're going to have to do.

 

We are dealing with hazardous materials.  There's no question about that.  And there's risk whenever one does that.  But we're going to be complying with all the relevant international and EPA standards.  We're going to give the ship back to the maritime administration as clean as it was when we got it.  And we're going to make sure that we dispose of the materials that we have to handle in a very safe manner and we take care of both the people that are involved, people that might be affected, and the environment.  We're as equally concerned about the environment as we are about anything else.  So safety comes first.  

 

The second thing that I want to hit on is the teamwork that has gone into this effort.  There are a number of organizations -- it starts with an international organization, obviously, the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, operating under the U.N.  There are Department of State, national security staff, and Department of Defense. 

 

Our view -- our role in this in the Department of Defense is relatively limited, but is crucial.  We're providing the equipment and the capability to deal with the weapons or the munitions or the chemicals that we're going to have to destroy, and that's what you're going to see today, and that's what our focus is on today.

 

And if I -- I could take all day to walk through all the individuals that have had major players in this, making all this possible, but I just want to touch on a few of the organizations.  Our partners from the Department of Transportation, the Maritime Administration obviously have been key.  When we set out to do this, putting this system on a ship, these systems on a ship wasn't the first option that came to mind, but it quickly became the best option for us.  And we've had great cooperation from the Department of Transportation and MARAD.

 

Within the Department of Defense, the Joint Program Office for Chemical and Biological Defense, which has been working, you know, for decades now on our own chemical weapons and destroying them, brings huge expertise to the table to help us with this job.  They're the source effectively of the hydrolysis units you're going to see.  This is a proven technology.  It's been used for a decade now in destroying our own materials, so we're not doing something new here or novel.  This is something we know how to do, and that team which will be operating the machines essentially knows exactly how to do that, and we're confident we'll do a very capable job.

 

Other players in this, the Edgewood chemical center at Aberdeen Proving Ground has been very important, is part of the effort.  The research and development and engineering command from the Army is very important.  In fact, the Army in general has stepped forward, and I have the undersecretary with me today who's been a major participant in this.  So I thank all of those people for all that they've done.  The Coast Guard, also, has been very involved.

 

Now, this team's effort didn't start today.  It started about a year ago.  There was a recognition that something was going to happen in Syria in all likelihood that would require us to do something with those chemical materials that were known to be there.  We had no idea what scenario it would be that would play out.  There were several options.  I don't think we would have picked the one that we're actually implementing now if we'd been asked to guess or even write down several possibilities.

 

But a year ago, we were not in a position to do this.  A year ago, we did not have the kind of capacity that was needed to go and remotely in some other location destroy chemical materials that are using chemical weapons.

 

We recognize that -- that shortfall.  And we've put together a team that I talked about that went out and acquired the systems that you're seeing.  They're based on, as I said, existing systems, so that wasn't a technically difficult thing for us to do, but there is a lead time associated with that.

 

So the team started working.  It was an interagency team.  DOD had the role that I talked about earlier, acquiring the capacity that we needed no matter what happened that might bring these materials into our hands where they would need to be destroyed.  So now we're in a position where we can move forward and act.

 

And as we looked at those scenarios, we had the choice.  We could have waited to see what happened and then react to that or we could have moved out ahead of time and been prepared for what might happen and was likely to happen.  And fortunately, today we took the latter course.  We acquired these machines, we tested them, we know they're capable of doing the job, and we're prepared and have the people ready to go operate them, as well.  So we're in a relatively good position because of that.

 

One of the things that allowed us to do that was the existence of flexible funding that we could apply to buy these machines.  The hydrolysis -- the field-deployable hydrolysis systems cost about $5 million apiece.  And we had money in the -- in an account called CTR for cooperative threat reduction.  It's used around the world to destroy chemical, nuclear and other dangerous materials, and we were able to apply those funds -- we had to notify the Congress and then use those funds, but that flexible funding vehicle which worked around our normal two-year process of getting money for something the Department of Defense does was incredibly important to us and allowed us to be in the position that we're in here today that allowed that team to do what it had to do.

 

I'm going to say a couple of words about the capacity that exists here.  Again, this is not new technology.  This is not a high-risk thing that hasn't been done before.  Machines like this, very similar to this have been used for about 10 years now to destroy our own chemical materials.  So we have people who understand them very well and will be able to operate them very safely.

 

The team that put this together is a government team.  It was an Army team primarily, the Army civilians who worked together.  And if you want to applaud anybody as you go around today and get a chance to talk to any of these people, the Army people that are going to deploy for the next few months to go out and conduct this mission are heroes.  They are people that are really going to go forward and do what needs to be done to get this job done, working essentially seven days a week until it is done and ensuring that it's done safely and the environment and people are protected while they do it.

 

So that's essentially what we're about.  You'll hear more from some of the technical experts about exactly how these machine works and what they do.  But I want to bring on now my partner in this, the acting administrator for the Maritime Administration, Paul.  Here you are.

 

PAUL JAENICHEN:  Thank you, Frank.  Good afternoon.

 

And glad to see everyone here.  They can see firsthand the capability of the vessel you see behind you, which is the Motor Vessel Cape Ray, before it sails as part of the U.S. contribution to the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons and the U.N. joint mission to eliminate chemical weapons in Syria.

 

While the primary purpose of our national defense reserve fleet that is operated by the Maritime Administration, the ready reserve force vessel that you see behind me and the two on either side, these vessels support the rapid movement of equipment and supplies to support the Department of Defense normally.  But they're also used for so much more.  There are a wide variety of roles that we use these federal ships for around the country, whether they're serving as platforms for training the Department of Defense or Homeland Security personnel, but they also serve as real-world assets to train our federal and local law enforcement officers to gain proficiency in a shipboard environment.

 

But these vessels are also used to provide rapid humanitarian response in times of emergency and in national disasters.  The Cape Ray and the other 46 ships -- and you see three of them here -- they have served in recovery efforts around the world.  Internationally, most recently, they served in 2010 in the -- in the earthquake in Haiti and locally here in the U.S. in 2005 for Hurricane Katrina and Hurricane Rita and, more recently, in 2012, we had three ships of similar capability that supported the relief workers that were up in the Northeast during Superstorm Sandy.

 

This ship is now -- it's making it possible, with the technology that you're going to see here today, to destroy chemical weapons agents at sea and sparing all nations the hazards of neutralizing those agents on their own soil.  This is an effort that the Department of Transportation and the Maritime Administration is certainly honored to be able to support and assist, proving the -- essentially the versatile resources that we have available, and that's the ready reserve force ships and our U.S. merchant marine who are readily able and, when called, serve our nation so capably.

 

In closing, I'd like to make a couple of thanks to the hardworking U.S. mariners from our maritime labor unions, specifically the marine engineer benevolent association and the Seafarers International Union, also the ship manager, Keystone, and all the shipyard workers, like -- (inaudible) -- industries and here at General Dynamics NASSCO-Earl Industries that have maintained the readiness of our ready reserve force ships.

 

It's no small task to keep a 30-year-old vessel like these ready to serve with little to no advanced warning.  And I just wanted to say that we understand and we appreciate their efforts, because without them and without this ship, this mission is not possible.  Thank you.

 

MR. WHITMAN:  I know you're anxious to talk to the ship's captain and our subject matter experts, but Undersecretary Kendall and the administrator have (off mic) take a couple of questions (off mic) 

 

Q:  When do you expect sea trials to begin?

 

UNDER SEC. KENDALL:  There have been some trials already.  There will be additional sea trials before the ship departs.

 

Q:  And when -- when is the departure?

 

UNDER SEC. KENDALL:  The departure will depend upon a number of factors, but we expect within about two weeks the ship to depart.

 

Q:  How long do you expect this -- this mission to take?  How -- how much chemicals can it handle?  Can it handle 100 metric tons?

 

UNDER SEC. KENDALL:  It can handle quite a bit more than that.  We expect to deal with about 700 tons on the ship.  And we have the capacity to deal with that.  The total amount of time we're allowing for the actual destruction operations is about 90 days.  That's a factor of 50 percent, allowing for sea states where we can't operate.  So the actual time we'll have to operate the systems is about 45 days, but we're allowing 90 days of time, because we may not be able to operate all the time.

 

Q:  What's your understanding of the progress they're making in getting the weapons out of Syria in order to get them to the ship in time?

 

UNDER SEC. KENDALL:  That's a Syrian responsibility.  That's their obligation under the agreement we have with them.  And we expect them to fulfill that obligation.

 

Q:  Mr. Secretary (off mic)

 

Q:  What's the biggest difference between (off mic)

 

Q:  (off mic) three scenarios that you had considered and that you -- that eventually you guys thought that this was the best scenario.  What makes this scenario -- and I guess when you say that, you mean by using a ship to do this -- what makes this the best way to do this operation?

 

UNDER SEC. KENDALL:  It's the factor that Paul mentioned, okay?  This avoids having to put these materials on somebody's territory, where you have to deal with all the political and environmental conditions associated with doing that under local law.  When I talked about scenarios earlier, I was talking about all the many things that could have happened in Syria, okay?  There are any number of things that could have happened as the conflict there plays out, and, you know, some of them worse than others, but in many of them, some opportunity possibly presenting itself to destroy these dangerous materials.

 

So we didn't know what -- which of those scenarios might happen.  We certainly would not have predicted the one that did happen that resulted in the agreement, you know, a few months ago, but we're prepared to deal with that now because of that.

 

Once that agreement was signed, then the question was, which scenario for the actual destruction to follow?  So it's a separate subject.  But to deal with the materials themselves, we looked at a number of options and at -- at all times, I think there was some consideration being given to the possibility of operation on a ship or perhaps a barge, and that became -- as we sorted through the various different options -- the best way to do this.

 

Q:  Will the chemical substances be loaded directly from the Norwegian and Danish ships onto Cape Ray?  Or will it be unloaded in land first?

 

UNDER SEC. KENDALL:  They're going to have to be transshipped.  They're going to have to be moved from the Danish and Norwegian ships that picked up them onto the Cape Ray.  And exactly where and how that process will take place hasn't been finalized yet. 

 

We think that's a fairly short two-day operation maybe.  And we're prepared to do it with a variety of ways that will depend upon agreement about a port and the facilities that are there and what the best -- best mechanism is to do that.  The containers that are being used are -- I want to point out -- these are ISO, international standards organization, containers, so it'll be a reasonably safe process, we think, to do that.

 

Q:  Mr. Secretary, how confident are you that Syria will, in fact, give up the weapons.  They're -- there are news reports out today and yesterday that the initial ships were actually turned away from -- from receiving it.  How confident --

 

UNDER SEC. KENDALL:  As -- as my public affairs person pointed out, this is about the technical aspects of things today.  And as I mentioned, that's a Syrian obligation.  We expect them to fulfill their obligation.

 

Q:  Will the Navy be providing assets to protect the ship while this operation is going on?

 

UNDER SEC. KENDALL:  Yes, it will.  There will be naval assets that will be providing security for the ship while it's conducting operations.  And the exact details of that have not been worked out yet.

 

MR. WHITMAN:  Let's go right over here (off mic) 

 

Q:  What is the -- what is the most challenging thing in destroying these chemical weapons on the ship?

 

(UNKNOWN):  Most -- most challenging thing in destroying the chemical weapons. 

 

(UNKNOWN):  The most challenging thing with regard to --

 

Q:  On the ship, to destroying these chemical weapons?

 

UNDER SEC. KENDALL:  I'll let you save that question for the people actually doing the work, okay?  I think the pressures of time is probably -- which is what I would say.  There's a lot of work that has had to be done fairly short, and it's been really remarkable to me how people have come together, industry, DOD, the MARAD, and others to make all that work happen.

 

Q:  Can you tell us, what -- what is the difference -- the biggest difference between the way that the system has been used before versus how it's going to be used now?

 

UNDER SEC. KENDALL:  There's no fundamental difference, okay?  We have -- we have basically -- and I'll let you ask that question again when the technical people come up, but this is essentially the same chemical process that we have used to destroy some of our own materials.  So there's no mystery about the process.  It's a slightly different scale that we're doing it at here.

 

What we did not -- we had -- we had fixed installations that have hydrolysis units that could do this job.  But what we did not have was the transportable field-deployables -- (inaudible) -- using for these systems, you know, that could be moved somewhere else.  And the scenarios that I talked about, we could have been doing destruction at the locations in Syria.  We could have been doing them at another location in Syria.  We could have been doing them in an adjacent country or out of one of our allies.  So we didn't know when, where and how we would do the destruction.  We just thought there was a high probability we might have to do it.

 

Q:  What security presence will you have onboard?  What security presence will you have onboard to protect the destruction of the chemical weapons?

 

UNDER SEC. KENDALL:  There will be security provided, but I don't -- I'm not going to be able to go into the details of that.

 

Q:  What happens if there's rough weather?

 

MR. WHITMAN:  All right, ladies and gentlemen, we are going to have to wrap it up.  We'll take one more question right here.  You've been trying to get one in.

 

Q:  So once you -- Al Jazeera from the Middle East -- once you destroy whatever has to be destroyed, where is it going to be physically deposited, that safe, new water?  If you could be specific geographically (off mic)

 

UNDER SEC. KENDALL:  Yeah, what we'll do is convert materials that are chemical weapons themselves or precursors for chemical weapons.  We'll change them chemically into compounds that are no longer usable for that.  They're still hazardous materials in some cases, and they'll have to be destroyed and dealt with, but there are numbers of installations in many countries around the world who deal with hazardous chemicals, industrial chemicals, if you will, like that all the time.  And we're working to finalize who's going to actually take the chemicals that result from the process you're going to see.

 

Okay?

 

MR. WHITMAN:  With that, I'd like to ask (off mic) 

 

(UNKNOWN):  Thank you.

 

MR. WHITMAN:  (off mic) come on up to take all your really difficult questions.  

 

CAPTAIN RICK JORDAN:  How you doing?  My name is Rick Jordan.  I'm the captain of the Cape Ray.  I want to let you guys know, I'm really happy to have you here.  We have a lot to show you, a lot of things we're real proud of.  A little background on me, I'm from New Orleans.  That's where I call home.  I've been going to sea for about 40 years now, since I was 17, and I've been sailing master for about 20 years.

 

I work for a company, Keystone Shipping Company, and we are contracted with the Maritime Administration to operate this ship for them.  And that's what we do.  I'll introduce you to the two technical guys here.  This is Rob and Adam, and then we'll take your questions, okay?

 

ROB MALONE:  So hi, I'm Rob Malone.  I'm with the joint project manager for elimination, stationed out at Edgewood, Maryland.  I've been working for the last 20 years on destruction of the U.S. stockpile of chemical weapons, now taking that -- those lessons and transferring them over to this operation.

 

ADAM BAKER:  I'm Adam Baker.  I'm with the Edgewood Chemical Biological Center, ECBC, co-located with these guys in Edgewood, Maryland.  ECBC has a number of research engineering and operational capabilities that we apply to projects like these.  The people you'll see here are part of the operational team and the people that'll actually be on the boat performing destruction operations.

 

MR. JORDAN:  Yes, sir?

 

Q:  So how confident are you that this hydrolysis system will work?  And then what are your contingency plans?  What's your plan B if something goes wrong at sea?

 

MR. BAKER:  The technology -- yeah, I'm sorry.

 

MODERATOR:  Before we answer that question -- I'm sorry to -- we're going to have them give an overview of the technology that'll be used to sort of lay a ground understanding of the technology that is involved in the field-deployable hydrolysis systems, and then we'll take a few more questions and we'll also answer your question, Justin.  So if you gentlemen want to just give an overview of a little bit of the technology here, that would be great.

 

MR. BAKER:  Okay.  As Secretary Kendall mentioned, this process actually began last year.  Last February, we were given funding and direction to start designing, assembling, testing these systems.  We started February 4th.  And on June 27th, we demonstrated the first FDHS system up at Edgewood, Maryland.  

 

As he mentioned, there were a number of possible applications and scenarios where this would be used, and so we had to design this with a couple factors in mind.  One, for the short timeline, we had to ensure that we used existing technology.  We used the technology that's been used to neutralize some of these chemicals in various spots here in the U.S.  And we actually used the process from the Aberdeen demilitarization facility for mustard.  We used a process from the -- from the facility at Pine Bluff Arsenal for -- for the DF compound.  And based on the short timeline, we had to use this established chemistry and copy those systems as much as possible and just scale them down into a transportable form.

 

So using established technologies, given that this might be operated in a remote site, we had to be prepared to make the system transportable, to make sure it was self-sufficient as much as possible, to make sure that it -- that it had a high availability, that if it -- it doesn't break down much, and when it does break down, that you have the means to fix that and get it running again.

 

So we designed the system with all those factors in mind.  And we -- as I said, we demonstrated the first system June 27th.  We continued and produced two more systems later in the last year and began with this scenario actually installing them on the ship here in late November.

 

And I'll turn it over to Rob to talk a little more.

 

MR. MALONE:  So what you'll see on the -- the main trailer deck here, the Cape Ray, is two of the three systems that Adam's talking about.  So as we go through them, you'll see two parallel operations going on, on both sides.

 

The main trailer deck itself -- or let me start with our systems -- our systems are basically inside an environmental enclosure.  We'll have folks entering from a personal access area.  On the other side of the system, we'll actually be bringing in the chemical material and accessing the tent that way.

 

That enclosure is underneath engineering controls.  It's ventilated through carbon filtration systems similar to the systems we've used here in the United States for our operations.  And then the entire trailer deck itself is captured through environmental enclosure, basically, and that all feeds through carbon before it's ventilated out of the system.  So we've kind of got an enclosure inside of an enclosure when we do our operation.

 

One of the major challenges we've dealt with -- as Adam said, we were kind of flexible in our operation -- we really had to figure out on the Cape Ray how we are going to operate in three dimensions, because obviously when you're operating in the field, you're working out in two dimensions.  Here we've got material that's going to be going both on decks above us and decks below us, and so that's been the significant challenge and things that we've had to overcome to get the Cape Ray ready for deployment.

 

MODERATOR:  So, Justin, we'll take your question again.

 

Q:  Right, so what are the contingency plans?  What's your plan B if something goes wrong at sea? 

 

MR. MALONE:  So the technology itself, the chemical neutralization, as Adam mentioned, has been proven here in the United States.  Both the mustard and the other compound, DF, we've done it extensively here.  The mustard, for instance, we destroyed 1,800-ton containers of mustard up at the Aberdeen facility.

 

The reactors on the vessel are actually two spare units from our Aberdeen facility.  And the static mixers that we're using to actually bring the compounds together are another technology that we've proved out here in the United States.  The rest of it is -- is basic chemistry.

 

So very high reliability.  The system itself also has redundancy built throughout it, so when you get up and see the units, you'll see two pumps or two process lines everywhere.  And those are basically -- they're redundant systems.  So if -- if something breaks or a line gets clogged, we can isolate it, operate through the other process line, and then basically do the repairs while underway.

 

Q:  Can you tell me about the -- the ship's crew?  Who's going to be manning this vessel?  How many people?  Where are they from?  And also, who will be operating the system itself?  Are we talking about seasoned mariners or will this be their first trip to sea?

 

MR. JORDAN:  That's a good question.  I'm glad you ask it.  Where are the crew from, what size crew and that sort of thing?  The crew -- my crew -- I have a crew of 35.  The normal crew complement on this ship is 29, but we've ramped up an additional six folks so that we can support the hotel services, for lack of better words, more.  The crew -- it's a normal merchant mariner crew.  I have -- I will say that the unions have been very good at letting me handpick and cherry pick some of the best guys I've ever sailed with before, and they've handpicked and cherry-picked the guys that'll be working for them.

 

We've got some really good folks on here that know how to train, and we've been training them.  They've got all kinds of shipboard damage control training and that sort of thing.  As far as these -- for spill response down below on the main trailer deck, ECBC, CBARR has some great -- great folks, and our training will be involved with supporting them for a spill down below.  If there becomes a damage control situation or a fire control -- fire control situation, then the -- my crew will step in, and we can handle those sorts of things.  

 

The whole key here is teamwork.  And there's been an unbelievable amount of teamwork in this -- in this whole process from the Maritime Administration, Military Sealift Command, my company, Keystone Shipping Company, and -- and I'm humbled by what's been going on here.  We've had about three or four days of hard training together, where we've been -- where we're making mariners out of them.  They've been making chemical construction -- destruction folks out of us.  And we're going to continue to train.  The whole trip will be a combination of -- (inaudible) -- production, training and being ready for the worst-case scenario.

 

Q:  How many people beyond the ship's crew are a part of this mission?

 

MR. JORDAN:  Yes, sir, the ships -- there will be 35 crew members onboard the ship, right, that will be assigned to the ship.  Is that -- that's your question?  And then -- and then ECBC has 63 folks, and then there's -- then we'll have a security team, and then EUCOM will have some folks onboard, as well.

 

Q:  How long will it take from your sail from Portsmouth until you arrive in Italy?

 

MR. JORDAN:  I -- we have not been given orders on exactly where we're going, but the center of the Med will be about 10 days, okay?

 

Q:  You don't know which port in Italy yet?

 

MR. JORDAN:  I have not been given that information, no, ma'am.

 

Q:  Has a deployment date been established yet?

 

MR. JORDAN:  No, sir.  I've not got my sail orders yet, no, sir.

 

Q:  (off mic) 

 

Q:  Hey, Rob, if there's rough weather when the chemicals are onboard --

 

(UNKNOWN):  Well, all right.  Hang on one second.  We're going to take one from CBS.

 

Q:  Yeah, what happens if there's rough weather when the chemicals are onboard?

 

MR. JORDAN:  Okay.  Well, obviously, weather is the single most important factor for -- as a mariner that I've got to consider.  The good news on the -- for the Cape Ray is that we have lots of things to mitigate weather onboard.  This ship has Gyrofin stabilizers which we can rig out, so when -- if it's rolling quite a bit, that'll dampen the roll.  Also, the -- the nice news about -- the other good thing about this trip is I'm not -- I don't have a destination.  We're just -- we're just providing a platform at sea.

 

So I can use the weather in my -- in my favor, putting the seas on the hip or -- or -- and that's -- and those kind of things, if the -- if the seas become unmanageable, then we have to shut down production.  Does that answer your question?  Okay, thanks.

 

Q:  (off mic) Mediterranean?  Sorry, do you expect --

 

MR. JORDAN:  Yes, ma'am, I'm sorry?

 

Q:  Do you expect (off mic) Mediterranean or pull out to the ocean?

 

MR. JORDAN:  I have not been given those kind of orders yet.  Okay?

 

Q:  How many hours does it take to reach the shores of Syria with the speed?

 

MR. JORDAN:  How many hours?

 

Q:  (off mic) many hours it takes, the trip to Syria shores?

 

MR. JORDAN:  Sir, I've not been given orders to go to Syria.  This -- that's -- just off the top of my head, I would say it'd be another -- another three days from the center of the Med, so about two weeks.

 

Q:  (off mic) what this can handle, how much -- how many chemical weapons?

 

(UNKNOWN):  Yeah.  The batch size for mustard is 130 gallons in a batch.  And that takes probably about two hours.  You're going to have two systems operating concurrently so it can increase throughput a little bit.  The -- the other chemicals are a bit higher throughputs.  You heard some of the estimates of time --

 

Q:  (off mic)

 

(UNKNOWN):  Yeah, 700 metric tons is the amount that he said.  And so we're -- you know, he gave you some of the figures of durations we're thinking of.  Does that answer your question?

 

Q:  (off mic) 

 

(UNKNOWN):  Yeah, we intend -- obviously, there's going to be a ramp-up period, because this is, you know, the first time on the ship.  It's going to be a slow start.  We're going to start one system at a time.  We're going to go very deliberately and very safely.  But -- yeah, those are the throughputs we're looking at.

 

Q:  (off mic) mustard gas, what other types of agents will you be dealing with?  You mentioned mustard.  What other -- can you list some of the other types of agents you'll be talking about?

 

(UNKNOWN):  Yeah.  Mustard gas and -- and DF is the other compound that's the most hazardous.  That's the sarin precursor.  Those -- those --

 

Q:  (off mic) sarin precursor being --

 

(UNKNOWN):  Nerve gas precursor, meaning it's one of the ingredients to go into sarin production.

 

Q:  And has this -- are they in missiles?  Are they weaponized?  Will you be getting them in containers?

 

(UNKNOWN):  No, this system is designed specifically for bulk liquid chemical agent, just in storage containers, no munitions, no explosives, nothing like that.

 

(UNKNOWN):  (off mic) in the back.

 

Q:  Just to clarify that, that 700 metric tons, can you break that down?  How -- is that 700 metric tons of chemical weapons component?  And then how much hazardous material does that produce?

 

(UNKNOWN):  (off mic) break down of the compounds (off mic)

 

(UNKNOWN):  I think he's asking how much (off mic) how much (off mic) 

 

(UNKNOWN):  All right.  Okay.  Well, I'll answer the second --

 

Q:  (off mic) how much hazardous material does it produce (off mic)

 

(UNKNOWN):  Right.  The -- the liquid effluent that comes out of this is about 1.5 million gallons.  As the -- as Secretary Kendall talked about, they're looking -- they are -- we are looking into the -- or the OPCW is looking into where that would be disposed of safely at a -- at a treatment storage and disposal facility that deals with these kind of chemicals regularly.

 

Q:  What's the -- how many chemical weapons are you taking on?  What's the weight volume of that?

 

(UNKNOWN):  That's the 700 metric tons, yeah.

 

Q:  What -- you say the technologies -- (inaudible) -- I mean, has it been -- has this been done at sea before, though?

 

(UNKNOWN):  No.  No, this -- this has not been done on this particular platform.  It has not been done at sea.  But it is -- it is taking the established operations that we've done at several land sites domestically and internationally and applying them here. 

 

MODERATOR:  We have time for two more.

 

Q:  You mentioned the dimensional aspects.  What other challenges involve, you know, being on the seas, when you're trying to do this?  I mean, are there -- are there other challenges that you're concerned about in terms of processing this?

 

(UNKNOWN):  As -- as the captain mentioned --

 

Q:  (off mic)

 

(UNKNOWN):  Yeah, as -- as the captain mentioned, the primary concern is whether -- that's the -- that's the biggest hurdle we have to deal with, with being on a ship.  Anything else?

 

MR. JORDAN:  Well, that's -- far and away, weather would -- far and away, weather would be the single -- is our single biggest obstacle on -- on this trip.  Okay, does that make sense?

 

Q:  As I understand the process, for each single unit of a chemical weapon that you neutralize, you can create anywhere from 5 to 14 times as much hazardous waste.  What is the nature of that hazardous waste?  And I realize it depends on the chemical agent that you're destroying, but can you tell me a little bit about that?

 

(UNKNOWN):  Yeah, when -- I think the secretary mentioned earlier, when they go through -- when we go through the process, we'll create a material that's basically very acidic.  We'll do a pH adjustment to that material, bringing it up to above neutral, so it'll be slightly caustic, so it's basically a caustic liquid waste at that point in time.  We typically equate that to Drano or, you know, other caustics, household cleaners, that type of material.

 

Q:  Any chance that it could be coming back to the United States?

 

(UNKNOWN):  Yeah, that's all part of the OPCW solicitation for the -- the commercial disposal facility, and we're not really privy to that information.

 

Q:  Is the tender open for that?  Is the -- has the tender for the disposal -- the final disposal open up?  Is it going on?

 

(UNKNOWN):  That's the OPCW.  You'd have to ask the OPCW about that.  We'll take one more -- one more question.

 

Q:  (off mic) this is a three-month mission.  And most of the -- the function will be occurring in -- you know, in the waters off the coast of Syria.  I mean, can you -- can you speak a little to geography and just the length, duration?

 

MR. JORDAN:  It's my -- or as I said, we have not gotten sail orders yet.  But it's my understanding that we are -- our mission is to go load the stuff in a port yet to be determined and then to go offshore in international waters and process all of this stuff until it's safe to be discharged to a reception facility.  Is that fair?  Okay.

 

Q:  Will the security people onboard the ship be U.S. military or private contractors?

 

(UNKNOWN):  Thank you.

 

MODERATOR:  Thank you all very much.  We're going to wrap the press conference portion.  If you want to prepare yourselves for the tour group one, if you could please move toward the ramp, not on the ramp, but right near it here, near the Porta Potty, we will get ready to go onto the ship tour.  Group two, you'll be out here with your public affairs folks, and they'll help you with any external shots of the ship that you want to gather, and then we'll switch.

 

(UNKNOWN):  (off mic) e-mail for the -- the DOD (off mic)

Link:

http://www.defense.gov/transcripts/transcript.aspx?transcriptid=5347