Hermiston Herald
Jan. 31, 2003

Army wants to keep some releases quiet

By Frank Lockwood
Staff writer

HERMISTON - A harmless release of nerve gas should not always have to be
reported, according to the Army and FEMA's draft recommendations for an
update to CSEPP policy. The state of Oregon disagrees, however, and health
officials are skeptical that a so-called Level-1 release of chemical warfare
agent is harmless.

Oregon's state toxicologist said the Army should be required to report all
AEGL-1 releases of nerve gas. Oregon Emergency Manager Chris Brown said he
expected the Army to adopt the disputed policy change regardless of
opposition, but perhaps with some modifications. In Oregon, all releases of
chemical agent, whether large or small, will be reported regardless of how
the national AEGL policy plays out, Brown said.

The Army has promoted policies that would release them from requirements to
report AEGL Level-1 plumes containing chemical nerve agent. Army data
indicates an AEGL-1 plume would have no known health effects, but Oregon's
state toxicologist, Michael Holcomb, is unconvinced. He says an AEGL-1
plume would travel furthest of all, and that there may be long-term health
effects to consider. Umatilla Chemical Agent Disposal Facility should be
required to warn the public if an AEGL Level-1 plume containing nerve gas
reaches citizens, Holcomb says.

The difference of opinions came to light at the Jan. 22 meeting of the
Chemical Stockpile Emergency Preparedness Program (CSEPP) Governing Board.
The Army and Federal Emergency Management Agency had asked for input because
they are updating their Policy Paper Number 20, which determines how they
interpret and apply the Environmental Protection Agency's Acute Exposure
Guideline Levels. The AEGLs (pronounced A-Eagles) are standards based upon
the expected consequences of various degrees of exposure to chemicals,
including those used in chemical warfare agent.

AEGLs may be of special interest to Hermiston residents, since Umatilla
Chemical Depot, about four miles west of town, stores tons of chemical
(nerve) agents VX and GB and HD (blister) agent - 155 millimeter and
eight-inch projectiles, M-55 rockets, M23 mines, 500 and 750 pound bombs,
spray tanks and one-ton containers. The EPA has identified toxicity values
for sulfur mustard and nerve agents, the active ingredients in 3,717 tons of
chemical weapons stored at Umatilla Chemical Depot.

Reaching agreement about standards of toxicity has proven difficult. The
EPA, with input from numerous sources including the Army, has defined and
redefined toxicity in order to better protect the public. In layman's terms,
the AEGL classifications range from irritating (Level-1), to sickening
(Level-2), to deadly (Level-3).

But while the above, imprecise descriptions are easier to grasp, the actual
AEGL definitions are more technical, and, after years of revisions, the Army
and various agencies have yet to agree. Those who fear lowering standards
are wary of the Army's recommendations and suspicious of any AEGL
re-wording.

Sen. Richard Shelby of Alabama wrote a Dec. 12 letter accusing the Army and
FEMA of having begun a "quiet process to reject the EPA's AEGLs by replacing
them with their own." Shelby said the Army's was trying to "weaken the EPA's
AEGLs by playing down and redefining the effects of exposure to toxic
chemicals."

But the Army is not changing the AEGLs, which are only set by the EPA, Army
spokesperson John Yaquiant said. The Army is merely deciding how to
interpret and apply those AEGLs.

Holcomb, the toxicologist, seemed unconvinced. He disagreed with some of the
Army's recommended policy changes as well. "The Army's position is they do
not think that citizens exposed to chemical warfare agents at AEGL-1 will
get sick at all," Holcomb told The Hermiston Herald. Holcomb spoke by
telephone and e-mail.

"To ensure scientific credibility we should not alter the national approved
definitions of AEGL-1 to make it appear that these chemical warfare agents
are harmless," he said. "The (Army's) trend is to say, 'Why worry if people
are exposed to a little nerve agent?'" he said.

"The EPA and the community have agreed that this stuff is toxic. ... Policy
Paper 20 allows the Army to continue chemical operation under toxic
conditions, but that may expose citizens to AEGL-1 concentrations (of nerve
agent)."

The Army's standards are different because soldiers have to live and
function under battle conditions, but ordinary citizens should not have to
do that, he said. "We are not supposed to be exposed to chemical warfare
agent - period."

Chris Brown of Oregon Emergency Management said Thursday that, despite
differences over the wording, he expects the Army to adopt a version of the
Policy Paper Number 20 that, nationwide, will allow the Army chemical
releases that are characterized as AEGL Level-1, without public
notification. The policy for Oregon may be stricter, however. A provision
included in the draft reads, "Final site-specific decisions for off-post
responses using AEGLs are a local CSEPP community decision."

Oregon CSEPP expects to work out a Memorandum of Agreement with the Army to
the effect that all releases of chemical agent will be reported to the
community, Brown said. He said, "Even if there are no effects, the county
would like to be notified."

Holcomb said he is not convinced there would be no effects. "While there may
be limited short term effects, long term effects are possible due to
exposure to low level chemical warfare agents," he said. The Gulf War
Syndrome is a prime example, he said. "Are we being overly conservative? I
do not think that we are being conservative in the absence of scientific
data on certain chemical agents."

Frank Lockwood may be reached at 567-6457 or by e-mail at
flockwood@hermistonherald.com.