Our Group Letter to the Secretary of the Air Force

Honorable Michael B. Donley
Secretary of the Air Force
670 Air Force Pentagon
Washington, DC 20330-1670

June 7, 2011

Dear Secretary Donley,

Along with Major Wes Carter and Lt. Colonel Paul Bailey, I represent a small group of veterans who flew the C-123K/UC-123K “Provider” during the period 1972-1982, after the aircraft had been used for spraying Agent Orange in Vietnam. We assumed the aircraft, with its tanks and spray gear removed, was clean and safe for flight. We loved the plane, particularly the famous “Patches”, and as all aircrews are supposed to, flew our airplane as much as possible in our normal airlift and aeromedical evacuation missions. 

The Air Force Reserve had three squadrons of C-123’s, our squadron at Hanscom AFB, and later Westover AFB, a squadron at Rickenbacker AFB and a squadron at Pittsburgh ARB. Each squadron had 16 aircraft assigned. Of the C-123 aircraft assigned to the 731^st Tactical Airlift Squadron at Westover, eleven of our assigned aircraft sprayed Agent Orange during Operation “Ranch Hand” in Vietnam. These aircraft all tested positive for Dioxin long after we flew them. We have never been notified of any health hazard we were exposed to during our eleven years of flying Air Force missions all around the world in these aircraft.

We have recently noticed a large group of us becoming sick with illnesses we knew to be ones in the Agent Orange-presumptive group. Checking on Google, we find many Air Force reports of the C-123K/UC-123K remaining “heavily contaminated” in 1993, 1996, 1998, 2000 and 2008, many years after their last Vietnam spray missions and a decade or more after we flew the planes into retirement at Davis-Monthan. Surplus sales were halted due to concerns about toxicity and liability. We also note that the remaining planes were decontaminated of their dioxin contamination by shredding the metal and melting everything into scrap ingots.

We feel it logical that if Air Force tests show the airplane so contaminated Davis-Monthan and AF museum workers can’t enter it without protective coveralls, respirators and decontamination afterwards, we have been exposed during the hundreds of hours we flew the Provider, and the thousands of hours in addition we worked on the ground. We asked Oregon Health Sciences University to look over the Air Force test data and on the science of it they concurred…we’ve been exposed.

The President of the Vietnam Veterans of America and some others hoping to help us are approaching Secretary Shinseki to request his ruling that aircrews and maintainers of the C-123K have been exposed to Agent Orange, on the basis of the Air Force tests establishing the toxicity of the airplanes. May we ask for the support of the Department of the Air Force in this? We were dedicated career Air Force flyers, on duty flying Air Force aircraft worldwide, on a weapon system which Air Force tests have shown toxic even a decade, two decades after our last use. We ask our Service and its leadership for whatever support is possible in addressing the Department of Veterans Affairs.

I will be happy to provide copies of documents showing the test results that confirm the heavy contamination of these aircraft and the failure of the Air Force to take any action to notify us of our exposure to dioxin should you require copies. We have numerous documents you may want to see.

Respectfully,

John O. Harris

Lt. Colonel, USAFR retired

107 James Circle

Mashpee, Ma 02649

(John's phone # here)

Vietnam Veterans of America - Riding to Our Rescue!

On June 21 I received an email, followed by a phone call, from Mr. Alan Oates who chairs the Agent Orange/Dioxin Committee for the Vietnam Veterans of America. He had recommended that the VVA support our position before their membership and before the leadership of the Department of Veterans Affairs. 

His recommendation was approved by the VVA executives, and they are now behind us 100%. I was very happy to learn of their improvement of our own proposal for recognition of the C-123K/UC-123K aircraft as an "Agent Orange Exposure Site" by the addition of the Army helicopters which did much the same thing...spray herbicides in Vietnam, then return to normal military duties throughout the world post-Vietnam...and thereby exposing Army aircrews as we ourselves have been exposed.

"No veteran left behind" is their motto. As aircrew, we'd never get out of an airplane without making sure everyone behind us was out first, and safe. We take care of the pax first, ahead of our own safety. Now, that same attitude of service is how the VVA is treating our veterans of the C-123K/UC-123K group...and I am proud to be first to offer our thanks for their pro-active position and service to all veterans, everywhere. We cannot fail but to benefit from their decades of leadership on veterans' issues, expertise on dioxin, and knowledge of the ins and outs of Washington's confusing corridors. Remember: it was Commissioner Linda Schwartz of Connecticut who put our two organizations in touch!


We have many of our group such as John Harris who are also Vietnam veterans...you should all be proud of your premier organization, the Vietnam Veterans of America!

Mr. Oates email from yesterday:

Dear Mr. Carter,

I am Alan Oates, Chairman of the Agent Orange/Dioxin and Other Toxic Substances Committee for Vietnam Veterans of America (VVA).  I am forwarding an email between President Rowan and myself and what VVA is working to do on your issue.  I appreciate the information you have been sharing with me over the past month.  Please continue to provide me with update information. 

Alan

Alan Oates

Subject: Fwd: Open Letter to Institute of Medicine Agent Orange Committee

President Rowan per your request,  I have followed up on this issue.  I find the information that this group has presented is factual.  I could not write the issue up any better than their open letter to IOM (forward as part of this email).    I have gotten feedback from many of the Agent Orange (AODOTS) Committee.  They are supportive of this group.  I have not conduct a formal vote on the issue as of yet.

I recommend that we write Secretary Shinseki and ask that post Vietnam war veterans who flew, served as crew members and maintained these aircraft be granted presumptive exposure.   I also would ask the Secretary to work with DOD in identifying and determine the disposition of all helicopters used in the Agent Orange spray operations.  This is needed as the veterans who flew and maintained these helicopter would are not recognized in the C 123 groups work.


Alan

Alan Oates
Chairman
Agent Orange/Dioxin and Other Toxic Substances Committee
Vietnam Veterans of America
  

Earlier Acknowledged "Coverups" of Agent Orange Issues

The 1996 memo from the AMSC JAG wasn't the first effort to keep quiet the information about harmful effects of dioxin. Very early in the development of Agent Orange dioxins, a researcher named Rowe sent a memo to Ross Mulholland, a manager with Dow in Canada, informing him that dioxin "is exceptionally toxic, it has a tremendous potential for producing chloracne (a skin disorder similar to acne) and systemic injury." Rowe ordered Mulholland in a postscript to the letter that "Under no circumstances may this letter be reproduced, shown or sent to anyone outside of Dow." 

Among those in attendance at one of the meetings of chemical company officials was John Frawley, a toxicologist for Hercules, Inc. In an internal memorandum for Hercules officials, Frawley wrote in 1965 that Dow was concerned the government might learn of a Dow study showing that dioxin caused severe liver damage in rabbits. Dow was concerned, according to Frawley, that "the whole industry will suffer." Frawley said he came away from the meeting with the feeling that "Dow was extremely frightened that this situation might explode" and lead to government restrictions.

The concern over dioxins was kept quiet and largely out of the public view. The U.S. government (trying hard to believe whatever science reports best fit national security) and the chemical companies presented a united front on the issue of defoliation, claiming it was militarily necessary to deprive the Viet Cong of hiding places and food sources and that it caused no adverse economic or health effects to those who came into contact with the rainbow herbicides, particularly Agent Orange.

AIR FORCE KNEW OF HEALTH DANGER

But, scientists involved in Operation Ranch Hand and documents uncovered between 2000 and 2006 in the National Archives present a somewhat different picture. There are strong indications that not only were many military officials aware as early as 1967 of the limited effectiveness of chemical defoliation, they knew of potential long-term health risks of frequent spraying and sought to keep that information from the public by managing news reports. Further, even the initial 1962 aircraft testing of Agent Orange spray operations indicated the C-123K would remain contaminated on the outside skin of the aircraft.

Dr. James Clary was an Air Force scientist in Vietnam who helped write the history of Operation Ranch Hand. Clary says the Air Force knew Agent Orange was far more hazardous to the health of humans than anyone would admit at the time.

"When we (military scientists) initiated the herbicide program in the 1960s," Clary wrote in a 1988 letter to a member of Congress investigating Agent Orange, "we were aware of the potential for damage due to dioxin contamination in the herbicide. We were even aware that the `military' formulation had a higher dioxin concentration many times more lethal than the `civilian' version, due to the lower cost and speed of manufacture. However, because the material was to be used on the `enemy,' none of us were overly concerned. We never considered a scenario in which our own personnel would become contaminated with the herbicide. And, if we had, we would have expected our own government to give assistance to veterans so contaminated."

One of the approaches we're coming across as we put forward the claim that flying the C-123K/UC-123K post-Vietnam exposed us to dioxins is a response "that's a controversial subject still under consideration." Actually, there is NO controversy to the contamination of the aircraft, NO controversy about the toxicity of dioxin, and NO controversy about the ill effects of dioxin exposure. The effort to suggest "controversy" is akin to the tobacco companies years ago claiming that cigarettes "are an adult custom, and any health effects are a matter of controversy and current studies." 

Sorry, bud, that shell-game shuffle won't cut it here!

AF JAG Attorneys Hide Agent Orange Data Aircrew Data!

In 1996, the Deputy and the Director of the AF Environmental Law division recommended that information about contaminated C-123K aircraft stored at Davis-Monthan as well as a handful of museum aircraft be contained within "official channels"! The memo in which they made this amazing recommendation was included in the GSA Finding which canceled all sales of contaminated C-123K, and which we obtained via FOIA from the Chief Counsel of the General Services Administration.


We should have been given this information once it was established as reasonably correct. That had been established already with studies completed as early as 1993, three years before this JAG officer, Major (later Colonel) Ursula Moul wrote, and her commander, Colonel J. Abbott, endorsed "I do not believe we should alert anyone outside official channels of this potential problem", a problem many of us believe has led to death and illness of C-123K crewmembers. You will see the name of Major Ursula Moul on a whole lot of these contamination papers! Always recommending restricting essential information.


Hard to imagine, isn't it? As aircrew, we all had at least Secret clearances, and our official duties involved manning and supporting the weapon system we'd been assigned, and that was already hazardous duty...we didn't need dioxin contamination to increase our risks! And we certainly didn't need our own JAG officers to restrict information that we and our families needed to protect our health. They didn't even allow our flight surgeons to have this information. If Colonel Moul had been a passenger on a flight and we had to belly in somewhere, she absolutely knows to her very core that every crewmember on the airplane would risk death to get her out to safety...why couldn't she see to our safety with a health alert?


Colonel Moul certainly knows something about restricting release of information that the public needs, as it was the topic of her thesis while completing her Master of Laws degree at George Washington University.


Ya gotta ask yourself...would TV's Navy JAG Harm Rabb have done this to us? No way. On TV, military attorneys like Harm have ethics! BTW, thought his lovely costar was a Marine?

Agent Orange- History's C-123K Chapter Just Won't End

His right hand self-concously hidden because it ends in a round jumble of undeveloped fingers, the young graduate student Ben Quick was driven to see the surplus C-123Ks at Davis-Monthan Air Force Base back in 2008. A trip into the past which dictated his own future. You see, Ben's dad gifted him a "minor glitch" in Ben's DNA, a leftover of Pop's service in Vietnam during the War. Ben was visiting Davis-Monthan to learn more about that gift, and the airplanes which delivered it, the UC-123K "Provider", now surplus and in storage at Davis-Monthan.


Ben's driver at Davis-Monthan was the head of public relations at the base, and together they drove to the perimeter fence...and could go no further. "Authorized Personnel Only" was the sign, and hazmat suits with respirators and cautious decontamination was its meaning...

"They're fenced off. You can't get to 'em. Nobody goes in there."


"Why"


"Well, the toxin."


That's dioxin, folks. The poison on the aircraft which was even more intense back in '72-'82 when members of the 731st Tactical Airlift Squadron and the 74th Aeromedical Evacuation Squadron flew the plane. The dioxin had deteriorated greatly in the desert heat and in the 30 years since its last use in Vietnam, but it remained deadly enough to take serious precautions. These precautions were not taken while we flew the airplane we were assigned. And like good aviators, we flew as much as possible to become as proficient as possible, meaning we became as contaminated as possible.


I re-read Ben's article this morning when I woke up in discomfort. I have a handful of illnesses, most of them Agent Orange-presumptive. It is presumptive of me to state that Agent Orange caused my problems, but I do believe so. I especially believe because Ben's article reminds me that official history of Operation Ranch Hand details the fact that in 1954  DOD was notified by Monsanto that Agent Orange was contaminated by a toxic substance...dioxin. The official history offers the fact that scientists from Harvard and CalTech, and other universities, approached DOD repeatedly (and publicly), and convinced the military to end Operation Ranch Hand and the use of Agent Orange...AO tests showed it so toxic, that one drop in four million gallons of water (4 parts per trillion) induced cancer in rats. Finally, we're told that the mixture used in the War was more toxic than that due to a more economical manufacturing process and mixing procedures...it was as high a concentration as 140 parts per million.


We're not on this blog to debate Agent Orange in Vietnam. Not part of our brief. But we are here to state that our duty to America placed us aboard the C-123K/UC-123K at a time that the Air Force knew contamination remained. You see, the very engineering and testing procedures to develop the UC-123K spray apparatus included reports that the airplane remained contaminated after spraying. So contaminated that brooms and water hoses wouldn't remove the remnants. Even scraping down to the metal wouldn't remove the toxins, as the poison had penetrated the metal.


Thus, there were official records to suggest the aircraft were known to have remained contaminated after Vietnam because the testing done before Vietnam said so. More of concern to us is that when the Air Force became re-aware of this in 1994, AFMC general officers and JAG attorneys focused their concerns on the resale of the airplanes, on the political implications of having sold contaminated aircraft to foreign governments, and on the political implications of having sold toxic airplanes to Disney! That the public would find disturbing...poisons and Disney. 


I haven't met any conspiracy nuts in the Air Force and few outside it. It is hard to believe there is or was any conspiracy to expose us to toxins in our flying duties...I don't believe that is the case. What is crystal clear, however, is that from 1994 on, none of the memos, reports, tests, findings, inspections, publicity...nothing was able to bring forth a concern about us aircrews! As aircrews the very first of our concerns is the safety of the people we are flying. We'd do anything to protect their safety...that's why we wear wings. Why did these officers (LtGen Farrell, Col Ursula Moul, Col John Abbott, LtCol Wade Weisman, Mr Ralph Schoneman, BGen Tom Hanes, Col Joseph Corcoran, BGen Olan Waldrop and others), in the performance of their duties, officers who should have known of our concerns, fail to concern themselves with our safety?


Ben's article appeared in Orion Magazine in 2008 and his talent is obvious. It is also obvious that he has learned to touch-type with five fingers on one hand and a stump on the other, thanks to his father's intense exposure to Agent Orange. The father's back looked like raw hamburger and was diagnosed as chloracne...intense exposure to herbicides, and dad didn't heal until about seven years after his return from Vietnam. So Ben's initial birthday gift from his dad was a set of twisted DNA, not quite like it should have been without Agent Orange.


I guess my question is why did a public affairs officer at Davis-Monthan AFB and her graduate student guest know the aircraft were contaminated...why did apparently everybody responsible for them in AFMC and the Air Force Medical Service know, but nobody got around to telling us aircrews. Everybody knew but us. Everybody was taking precautions...but us!

note: Ben visited Davis-Monthan before the remaining C-123K/UC-123K aircraft were decontaminated by destruction, melted into scrap metal ingots.

EXTREMELY Important Proof of Dioxin Exposure in C-123K!

Greg Parks, the very helpful Chief Counsel of the US Civilian Board of Contracts, General Services Administration recently provided me extremely useful, extremely pertinent, and extremely timely information concerning C-123K/UC-123K Provider Agent Orange contamination, a subject we're all extremely concerned with.

Extremely kind of him, and extremely important as we former aircrews and maintainers try to convince the Air Force, Department of Defense and Department of Veterans Affairs about our extremely worrisome problem.

You've noticed my use of the word "extremely"? It is an extremely perfect way to describe the Agent Orange contamination of the aircraft we flew, because that's exactly the word used by the Air Force about the C-123K dioxin contamination! The United States Government, acting through the General Services Administration and the United States Air Force in their April 2000 brief to Judge Martha DeGraff (Board of Contract Appeals, GSA, Washington DC), determined on Page 24 that "There is no question, that dioxin contaminated aircraft constituted extremely hazardous and/or dangerous personal property."

I don't see how the Department of Veterans Affairs can fail to reach the conclusion that if other US Government agencies establish the aircraft we flew in and maintained to be extremely hazardous and contaminated, we therefore have been exposed to the contaminants! Neither can I understand why the Air Force, having in April 2000 reached this conclusion in their report to a Federal judge, decided on 9 June 2011 that it was not possible or appropriate to alert the veterans who'd been contaminated! I'm extremely disappointed!

Here's my take on this. We flew airplanes that were already contaminated with Agent Orange residue left over from Operation Ranchhand in Vietnam, from 1972 to 1982. Multiple Air Force tests establish the dioxin contamination of these airplanes even 20 to 30 years after their last spray missions! The planes were so contaminated in 2000 that the base safety and medical officials insisted that hazmat suits and respirators be used to protect workers entering the remaining stored planes. Multiple US Government agencies testified as to the dioxin contamination of the planes we flew that remained in the Davis-Monthan storage area. The planes were so contaminated that the Air Force opted to decontaminate them by melting them into scrap metal ingots. 

The VA requires non-Vietnam veterans claiming Agent Orange exposure to prove we were actually exposed to Agent Orange...these testimonies and the referenced Air Force test clearly establish that proof for all veterans also able to prove they maintained or flew the C-123K/UC-123K. It would take a tremendous and false, even vicious twist of logic to somehow determine the aircraft were contaminated and "extremely dangerous" enough to require hazmat protection yet also determine we weren't exposed to the contaminants in 1972-1982 when the dioxin had had even lesstime to decompose.

Ideas on this?

         Wes Carter, 74AES

      http://www.c123kcancer.blogspot.com

DOCUMENTATION:

Entire GSA/USAF Report to Judge Martha Degraff...click HERE

AF Museum Data Sheet on Patches, Tail 362...click HERE

AF test report showing Patches Tail 362 is contaminated...click HERE

AF JAG recommends "keeping information in official channels" only...click HERE

Davis-Monthan requires hazmat protection inside C-123K...click HERE

SAF/IG decides not to alert C-123 crews about our dioxin exposure...click HERE

University study confirms C-123K aircrew dioxin contamination...click HERE

Our Point Paper & Support Documents about our dioxin exposure...click HERE

COMRADES: (I've never used that word before...this is fun!)...please contact Paul Bailey to provide your name, Agent Orange-related illnesses if any, and names and illnesses of other C-123K/UC-123K people that you know of. Please spread the word to others.

Museum C-123K/UC-123K Display: Contaminated Aircraft?

I've learned that the National Museum of the Air Force has loaned out several C-123K/UC-123K aircraft for other museums and for different bases' static aircraft displays. But...most of these other organizations haven't taken the same precautions as have the folks at Wright-Patterson...and that means the public is at risk of physical contact with contaminated aircraft surfaces.

Here's the list of museum displays and preserved aircraft, with the two known contaminated spray aircraft in RED. AF records show that Tail#603 was put into the museum system but location is now uncertain. While only two of this list are known spray birds, AFMC in 2010 determined it was too difficult to recognize which aircraft had been used as UC-123K and converted back to C-123K without a records trail, and was surprised to learn that most of the 21 planes in the surplus fleet actually turned out to be spray birds (18 of 21). With that experience it is reasonable to conclude that at least some of these C-123K planes were spray aircraft at some time.

Fairchild C-123 Provider 

 Aircraft         Tail #              Last Seen          Location

C-123B-4-FA C-123K	54-0580	APR11		PIMA COUNTY MUSEUM (AZ)
C-123B-5-FA C-123K	54-0592@	APR10		Craven Regional Airport, New Bern (NC) N9692N
C-123B-5-FA C-123K	54-0593	APR11		LACKLAND AFB (TX)
C-123B-5-FA C-123K	54-0604	OCT99		Linear Air Park Dyess AFB (TX)
C-123B-5-FA C-123K	54-0609	APR11		FORT BRAGG (NC), 82nd AB DIV WAR MEMORIAL
C-123B-6-FA C-123K	54-0610	JUL10		Hill Aerospace  Museum (UT)
C-123B-6-FA C-123K	54-0612	JAN11		March Field Air Museum (CA)
C-123B-7-FA C-123K	54-0629	MAR11		MCGUIRE AFB
C-123B-7-FA C-123K UC-123K	54-0633	MAY11		Robins AFB (GA)
C-123B-8-FA C-123K UC-123K	54-0658	JAN01		Air Mobility Command Museum Dover AFB (DE)
C-123B-8-FA C-123K	54-0664	FEB99		Air Heritage Museum Beaver Falls (PA) N22968
C-123B-9-FA C-123K	54-0668	NOV06		LACKLAND AFB (TX) [actually Tail#593?]
C-123B-9-FA C-123K	54-0669	JUL02		POPE AFB (NC) AS '372'
C-123B-9-FA C-123K	54-0674	MAR97	P	Valiant Air Command Titusville (FL)- Ex Air America "HR-ALK"
C-123B-9-FA C-123K	54-0683	NOV10		Edwards AFB (CA)
C-123B-10-FA C-123K	54-0692		P	Octave Chanute Aerospace Museum (IL) Not listed on web site DEC02
C-123B-10-FA C-123K	54-0706	DEC96		Las Vegas (NV) On the strip as "N709RR"
C-123K	55-4505	MAY11	B	PIMA COUNTY MUSEUM (AZ) Coast Guard Colors
C-123K	55-4512	AUG09	B	Castle Air Museum (CA)
C-123B-13-FA C-123K	55-4533	SEP04	P	Hurlburt Field Airpark (FL)
C-123	55-4558			WASILLA (AK)
C-123B-15-FA C-123K	55-4567	JUN10	P	LITTLE ROCK AFB (AR)
C-123K	56-4362	MAY11	B	Wright Patterson AFB (OH) MUSEUM
C123	56-4395	JUN94		KULIS ANGB
C-123	?	MAR09	G	Wendover (UT)

Disturbing OSHA Information re: Dioxin & Our C-123K/UC-123K Exposure

Read through to the bottom. It is clear that the airplanes we flew would have been, if first inspected by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration, determined to be unsafe work environments. We didn't know about the contamination at the time, but various Air Force reports dating back to the experimental use of the C-123 for spraying, done at Eglin AFB in 1961, proved that Agent Orange spray aircraft would remain contaminated with dioxin. 


Any of those groundpounders in authority bother to read the reports sent to them as carefully as we're supposed to read our NOTAMS?
Somebody should have known. 
Somebody should have cared. 
Somebody should have acted!
----------------------------from OSHA Data------------------------

OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH GUIDELINE FOR 2,4,5-T.

INTRODUCTION

This guideline is intended as a source of information for employees, employers, physicians, industrial hygienists and other occupational health professionals who may have a need for such information. It does not attempt to present all data, rather it presents information and data in summary form.

Permissible Exposure Limit:
The current OSHA standard for 2,4,5-T is 10 milligrams of 2,4,5-T per cubic meter of air (mg/,m3) average over an eight hour work shift.

Health Hazard Information:

Routes Of Exposure
2,4,5-T can affect the body if it is inhaled or if it comes into contact with the eyes or skin. It can also affect the body if it is swallowed.

Effects Of Overexposure
Exposure to 2,4,5-T may cause abdominal pain, nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, and blood in the stool. It may also cause acne and liver damage. Animal experiments have shown these contaminants may produce damage in unborn rats.
Reporting Signs and Symptoms
A physician should be contacted if anyone develops any signs or symptoms and suspect that they are caused by exposure to 2,4,5-T.

Summary of Toxicology
2,4,5-T (2,4,5-Trichlorophenoxyacetic acid) is of low toxicity. The oral LD50 for dogs is in the range of 100/mg/kg or higher; effects are limited to a slight to moderate stiffness in the hind legs with the development of ataxia. Contaminants of commercial preparations of 2,4,5-T have been 2,3,6,7-Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin (TCDD), a potent acnegenic agent which is hepatotoxic in animals; they are presented as unwanted side products of synthesis of 2,4,5-T. In a study of 73 workers in a 2,4,5-T manufacturing plant, 13 had moderate to severe acne from dermatitis (chloracne) and 22 had gastrointestinal complaints, such as nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, liver dysfunction was found; although no air samples results were reported, the chloracne was thought to be a result of exposure to TCDD. 2,4,5-T dust is a slight irritant of the skin.

Chemical and Physical Properties
Physical Data
1. Molecular weight: 255.5
2. Boiling point (760 mm Hg); Decomposes above melting point
3. Specific gravity (water=1): Greater
4. Vapor Density (air+1 at boiling point of 2,4,5-T): Not applicable
5. Melting point: 158 Celsius (316 Fahrenheit) decomposition
There is also a similar report on 2,4-D.

SUBSTANCE IDENTIFICATION 
Formula: Cl2C6H3OCH2COOH
Synonyms: 2,4-Dichlorophenoxyacetic acid
Appearance and odor: Colorless and odorless solid

PERMISSIBLE EXPOSURE LIMIT :The 1978 OSHA standard was set at 10mg per cubic meter of air averaged over an eight hour work shift.

HEALTH HAZARD INFORMATION
ROUTES OF EXPOSURE
2,4-D can affect the body if it is inhaled, contacts the skin or eyes or swallowed. It may enter through the skin.

EFFECTS OF (OVER) EXPOSURE
1. Short term may cause weakness, stupor, muscle twitching and convulsions. It may
cause a rash and may cause liver damage.
2. Long term is not known; the issue is clouded by politics.
3. Exposure requires a physician.

SUMMARY OF TOXICOLOGY
2,4-D dust causes signs of both hypo- and hyperexcitation of the central nervous system in animals. Sudden death is possible in massive doses. I have no evidence in any death of a human by ventricular fibrillation. Persons or animals exposed to massive dosages would have convulsions of a violent nature.
Contact on the skin will cause dermatitis.

CHEMICAL AND PHYSICAL PROPERTIES
PHYSICAL DATA
1. Molecular weight: 212
2. Boiling point (760 mm Hg): Decomposes
3. Specific gravity (water=1): 1.1(estimated)
4. Vapor density (air=1 at boiling point of 2,4-D): 7.63
5. Melting point 140C (248 F)
6. Vapor pressure at 20C (68 F): Essentially zero
7. Solubility in water, at 20C (68 F): 0.07ppm
8. Evaporation rate(butyl acetate=1): N/A

REACTIVITY: contact with strong oxidizers may cause fires and explosions.
A very important note: in 1978 OSHA report quoted stated "Parenteral administration to dogs has caused sneezing, lacrimation, and rubbing of the eyes, along with gastrointestinal disturbances." In 1991 it was learned that dogs exposed to 2,4-D used in normal weed control in backyard America became victims of cancer at unusually high rates.

Original post by: DaveBarker, Military.COM

Hill AFB Releases Report of C-123 Toxin Survey - 2009

The report of the 2009 toxin survey was released in PDF form by Hill AFB as a result of our FOIA. It is available for download here.

In general, it surveys by tail number the surplus C-123s at Davis-Monthan, thus including some of the Westover aircraft. Toxin numbers seem small compared to earlier reports, and I need some science here to learn whether dixon would degrade over the years the planes were stored, especially considering the conditions under which they were stored in the desert heat. Hill reports that the remaining C-123K aircraft were too contaminated to do anything with but...shred and melt into ingots!

Agent Orange Contaminated Aircraft Sold to Foreign Governments

Air Force records prepared by AFMC at Davis-Monthan AFB in 1996 indicate at least eight of the C-123K aircraft sold or otherwise provided to foreign governments are "suspected of Dioxin Contamination". Often as aircraft age and the United States retires them, other friendly countries purchase the planes or the US provides them as military support.


Foreign sales or transfers are managed out of Wright-Patterson AFB by the Air Force Security Assistance Center. I've requested information about whether these governments have been told about the "suspected dioxin contamination" but have not yet received an answer from AFSAC. Air Force records also indicate that the Air Force Environmental Law Division (Major Ursula Moul) in Oct 1996 recommended keeping such information within "official channels", so it may be that no notice was ever provided foreign users. In one memo she said she'd be doing something about notifying the buyers...but that notification is very hard to find...we're still looking, and so is the Air Force. Must be somewhere. She wouldn't overlook a safety issue like that, right?


Leaves us with an understanding that no alert was ever provided the US aircrews whose duty it was to fly these same contaminated aircraft between 1972-1982 before the planes were distributed.

Public Exposed to Contaminated C-123K at Warner-Robins Aviation Museum

On May 23 we visited the Warner-Robins Aviation Museum adjacent to Robins AFB Georgia...a superb collection skillfully presented by an outstanding organization of staff and volunteers.

A problem, however: Last year, AFMC melted down the remaining C-123K aircraft because of Agent Orange toxins (dioxin) an their inability to decontaminate effectively. Yet, here sits a UC-123K Agent Orange spray aircraft, Tail #633.


Another museum display UC-123K is Patches #362 at the Air Force Museum in Dayton, PH...and that was surveyed by Air Force specialists and reported as "heavily contaminated!" and remains roped off for public safety. So, why is the Robins UC-123K Provider, an aircraft identified by AFMC (Air Force Material Command) as toxic, sitting out on public display?


And why, oh why, is there a bench set beneath the wing (right about where the Agent Orange spray apparatus was ) for weary museum visitors to rest upon? Why wasn't this bird set apart as is Patches to prevent physical contact? Personally, I'm glad as heck to see the plane displayed...but prefer it done so safely!

Audie Murphy, the most decorated soldier of World War II (and a Texas National Guardsman) was a great soldier and not-so-great husband. His widow Mrs. Pamala Murphy, passed away last month in California. She dedicated her life to serving veterans, working as patient liaison at the Sepulveda Veterans Hospital full-time until age 87. She gave every veteran the same respect she had for her distinguished husband. (BTW, the first VA hospital I was ever in was Audie Murphy VA Medical Center, San Antonio TX). Audie Murphy was young...so young that after the war he could portray himself in To Hell and Back as a 16-year old kid! His best movie was The Red Badge of Courage...interesting to have a genuine hero like him explore the character's fear and cowardice with such understanding and passion. 


Great input from Ranch Hand veterans, the elder statesmen of Agent Orange issues, who on 20 May offered us a reference about dioxin which is excellent reading. Dioxin comes from lots of sources. 


I have been trying to get various AF leaders to comment on the Narrative and the reports generated by the AF about C-123K contamination. Everyone, including EPA, keeps bouncing inquiries back to the VA. It is a knee-jerk reaction and gets a hot potato off their desk, but I sure wish we could get input one way or the other. 
Several 74th and 731st members have their AO/dioxin paperwork in with the VA, and the New Hampshire  State Department of Veterans Affairs VSO considers it a solid case very likely  (for his particular client) to get approval on the first pass, and virtually certain on appeal. Hard to deny the AF reports about contamination, hard to deny exposure to that contamination when flight orders place a veteran aboard the contaminated aircraft for years, and hard to deny the numerous AO-presumitives...but still the VA will try very, very hard to do just that...deny the claims! 


Potato (and onion) farmer Paul Bailey is traveling this next week but still working on getting health information and flight orders from everyone and building a data base for us. John Harris has been super about digging up other influential folks, ROA leadership, 731st veterans, and paperwork of use to us. One important thing we're looking for now is any VA denials of application for service connection from aircrews on Providers submitted between 1972-1982. 

We need to better understand the approach the VA took on denying applications. General Walker had prostate cancer and applied for service connection but was denied...others have as well and we need to get info. I will be submitted an FOIA to the VA on that today but a response will be a month or more away. 


Please...if you have a VA application which has been denied, please copy me on it after blocking your personal information! If you know the survivors of folks who've died of AO presumptive illnesses (such as MSgt Bob Boyd, General Walker and Lou Paskovitz) please contact them and offer information from our group...they might benefit from our efforts and I need their input if they'd be kind enough to correspond.

DAV Declines Their Help

Well, actually DAV didn't decline...they simply suggested we bring our issue before each individual DAV post, in each state, to see if it floats up to the national level, as their national leadership is barred from action except as directed by resolution of the membership. His suggested approach to even becoming concerned about us would mean years of effort just to get the DAV interested...so it seems a strategy to prevent too much "stuff" like ours getting on their agenda. 


However, they can and will help any individual who applies to them for representation before the VA. A couple weeks back I wrote DAV's national headquarters as well as their Washington D.C. office, and the DC office kindly phoned me. Their representative carefully explained why they can't do anything except work issues approved by their membership.


I kept interrupting the gentleman to try to make the point that we are a group of veterans who might not be healthy enough to stick around long enough for that path to work for us. We parted with friendly good-byes...and great disappointment on my part and obvious relief on his for getting rid of my phone call.


What I'd hoped for was leadership, not buck-passing, on the part of the first veterans' organization I joined, and have been a life member of for more than 19 years. I'd hoped they would offer a letter of support, some strategy, some contacts, some information about AO issues, some encouragement...anything. Anything we can use before this thing is "resolved" by us getting swept under the rug by Old Man Time!  My mistake. I thought I joined DAV to offer help, and get it, as the need surfaced. 


Thank goodness the Vietnam Veterans of America didn't hesitate. Thank goodness Commissioner Linda Schwartz didn't hesitate. Thank goodness the Oregon Health Sciences University didn't hesitate! Thank goodness for friends when you need them.

Some senior folks who've been working this issue before I was painfully brought to focus on it have wisely counseled us to seek a class-action lawsuit. That is certainly an option, yet I fear becoming one of the groups (and there are many) which initiate such a suit and watch millions of dollars in fees and years of litigation pass by without resolution. Perhaps we should get some organization done along such lines, but I remain hopeful (until I get the BIG VA SMACK-DOWN) that we can present a logical and scientific case to the Department of Veterans Affairs and get them to positively evaluate us on an individual basis. I feel that as a class, we're too small to get any pro bono publico representation and we obviously lack the funds. And I feel too many of us lack the time. I want to savor a little victory in my lifetime, not from Heaven's Gates (as I'll get no farther than that, my wife warns!) Maybe we can get some attorney to meet part of the ABA's 50 hours a year guideline by offering advice or review of materials?