Developing Health-Based Pre-Planning Clearance Goals for Airport Remediation Following a Chemical Terrorist Attack: Decision Criteria for Multipathway Exposure Routes

Figures & data

Table 1 Percutaneous vapor exposure guidelines for (military) CWA personnel escape from selected CWA and TIC atmospheres, assuming respiratory protection. ^a

CWA or TIC	Example CWA personnel escape guidelines (mg/m^3) for 30-minute percutaneous exposure (with respiratory protection only, or a breach in skin-protective clothing)
Tabun (GA)	11.1 ^a ^, ^b
Sarin (GB)	6.0 ^a
Soman (GD) and Cyclosarin (GF)	1.5 ^a ^, ^b
VX	0.13 ^a ^, ^b
Sulfur mustard (H/HD)	0.1 ^a ^, ^b
Hydrogen cyanide (AC)	Not determined by NIOSH ^c
Cyanogen chloride (CK)	Not determined by NIOSH ^c
Phosgene (CG)	Not determined by NIOSH ^c

Table 2 Recommended airborne (inhalation, ocular) pre-planning clearance goals for transit passengers as well as various airport employees and personnel for selected CWAs and TICs. ^a

	Reasonable maximum clearance goals (mg/m^3)	Alternative clearance goals (mg/m^3)
	<8-h duration ^b	>8 but <24-h duration
CWA or TIC	exposure	exposure
Tabun (GA)	<0.0010 ^c	<0.0003 ^e
Sarin (GB)	<0.0010 ^c	<0.0003 ^e
Soman (GD) and Cyclosarin (GF)	<0.00050 ^c	<0.0002 ^e
VX	<0.000071 ^c	<0.000024 ^e
Sulfur mustard (H/HD)	<0.008 ^c	<0.003 ^e
Hydrogen cyanide (AC)	<1.1 ^d	<0.37 ^e
Cyanogen chloride (CK)	<0.25 ^f	<0.08 ^f
Phosgene (CG)	< 0.08 ^g	< 0.03 ^g

Table 3 Summary of estimated RfC values for CK.

Derived from information in these sources	Estimated RfC (mg/m^3)	Uncertainty factor for route-to-route extrapolation
Opresko et al. 1998	0.11	1
	0.035	3
USEPA IRIS	0.18	1
	0.058	3
USEPA Region 9 ^a	0.18 ^a	1 ^a

Table 4 Reference dose (RfD) and reference dose estimates (RfD_e) for CWAs and TICs. ^a

CWA or TIC	Chronic Reference dose (RfD or RfDe) (mg/kg/day) Ingestion: estimate of daily exposure level for general population; chronic exposure duration (7 yr to lifetime)
Tabun ^b (GA)	4 × 10^−5
Sarin ^b (GB)	2 × 10^−5
Soman ^b (GD) and Cyclosarin ^b (GF)	4 × 10^−6
VX ^b	6 × 10^−7
Sulfur mustard ^b (H/HD)	7 × 10^−6
Hydrogen cyanide ^c (AC)	0.02
Cyanogen chloride ^d (CK)	0.05
Phosgene ^e (CG)	No estimate available ^e

Table 5 Principal CWA degradation products and their estimated RfD_e. ^a

Agent Parent (CAS number)	Key degradation product	Degradation Product CAS number	Chronic toxicity value ^b (estimated RfDe, in mg/kg/day)
Tabun (GA) (77-81-6)	None of potential concern	—	—
Sarin (GB) (107-44-8)	Methyl phosphonic acid (MPA)	993-13-5	0.02
	Isopropyl methylphosphonic acid (IMPA)	1832-54-8	0.10
Soman (GD) (96-64-0)	Methyl phosphonic acid (MPA)	993-13-5	0.02
Cyclosarin (GF) (329-99-7)
VX (50782-69-9)	S-(2-diisopropylaminoethyl) methylphosphonothioic acid (EA 2192)	73207-98-4	6 × 10^−7
	Ethyl methylphosphonic acid (EMPA)	1832-53-7	0.028
	Methyl phosphonic acid (MPA)	993-13-5	0.02
Sulfur mustard (H, HD) (505-60-2)	Thiodiglycol (TDG)	111-48-8	0.400 ^c

Table 6 Health-based environmental screening levels for CWAs and TICs in residential and industrial soils. ^a

	Residential soil ^b			Industrial soil
CWA or TIC	Preliminary Remediation Goal (PRG) (mg/kg soil)	Risk-Based Concentration (RBC) (est.) (mg/kg soil) ^a	Regional Screening Level (RSL) (est.) (mg/kg/soil) ^e	Preliminary Remediation Goal (PRG) (mg/kg soil)	Risk-Based Concentration (RBC) (est.) (mg/kg soil) ^a
Tabun (GA)	2.8 (est.) ^a	3.1	3.1	68 (est.) ^a	82
Sarin (GB)	1.3 (est.) ^a	1.6	1.6	32 (est.) ^a	41
Soman (GD)	0.22 (est.) ^a	0.31	0.31	5.2 (est.) ^a	8.2
VX	0.042 (est.) ^a	0.047	0.047	1.1 (est.) ^a	1.2
Sulfur mustard (HD)	0.01 (est.) ^a ^, ^c	0.55	0.55	0.3 (est.) ^a ^, ^c	14
Hydrogen cyanide (AC)	1.6 × 10^3 ^d	NA	1.6 × 10^3	2.0 × 10^4 ^d	NA
Cyanogen chloride (CK)	3.9 × 10^3 ^d	NA	3.9 × 10^3	5.1 × 10^4 ^d	NA
Phosgene (CG)	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA

Table 7 Health-based environmental screening levels for principal CWA degradation products in residential and industrial soils and employing EPA PRG parameters.

	Residential soil	Industrial soil
Degradation Product of CW Agent	Preliminary Remediation Goal (PRG) (mg/kg soil) ^a ^, ^b (estimates)	Outdoor Worker Preliminary Remediation Goal (PRG) (mg/kg soil) ^a (estimates)	Indoor Worker Preliminary Remediation Goal (PRG) (mg/kg soil) ^a (estimates)
TDG (thiodyglycol)	2.4 × 10^4	6.0 × 10^4	8.2 × 10^5
EMPA (ethyl methylphosphonic acid)	1.7 × 10^3	4.2 × 10^3	5.7 × 10^4
MPA (methyl phosphonic acid)	1.2 × 10^3	3.0 × 10^3	4.1 × 10^4
EA 2192	4.7 × 10^−2	6.8 × 10^−1	1.2

Table 8 Drinking water concentrations considered protective estimates for site decontamination and verification.

	5 liter/day consumption ^a	15 liter/day consumption ^a
CWA or TIC	Drinking water concentration (μg/L)
Tabun (GA)	<140	<46
Sarin (GB)	<28	<9.3
Soman (GD)	<12	<4
VX	<15	<5
Generic nerve agent	<12	< 4 ^b
Sulfur mustard (HD)	<140	<47
Hydrogen cyanide (HCN; agent AC)	<6	<2

Table 9 Exposure parameter assumptions for HD and VX incorporated into SRCL assessment. ^a

Parameter	Estimated airport average	Estimated airport maximum	Units
ABSHD	0.084	0.084	Unitless
ABSVX	0.033	0.033	Unitless
BWw	70	70	Kg
BWc	15	15	Kg
CF1	3.65E+02	3.65E+02	days/year
CF2	0.041667	0.041667	days/hour
CF3	10000	10000	cm^2/m^2
DF work HD	285	427.5	cm^2/day
DF work VX	8.075	12.1125	cm^2/day
DF trans child HD	70.0	420	cm^2/day
DF trans child VX	1.98	11.9	cm^2/day
ED work	1	1	Years
ED child	1	1	Years
EF work	2	2	days/year
EF trans (child)	2	2	day/year
ETh child	2	12	hours/day
ETh work	4	6	hours/day
ETs work	4	6	hours/day
ETs child	2	12	hours/day
FQc	9.5	9.5	events/hour
FQeye	10	10	event/day
FQwork	1	1	event/hour
FTSHSh HD	0.5	0.5	Unitless
FTSHSh VX	0.0018	0.0018	Unitless
FTSHSs HD	0.1	0.1	Unitless
FTSHSs VX	0.0152	0.0152	Unitless
FTSBSh HD	0.25	0.25	Unitless
FTSBSh VX	0.0009	0.0009	Unitless
FTSBSs HD	0.05	0.05	Unitless
FTSBSs VX	0.0076	0.0076	Unitless
GIABS HD&VX	1	1	Unitless
IF work HD	54	81	cm^2/day
IF work VX	1.53	2.295	cm^2/day
IF trans HD	85.5	513	cm^2/day
IF trans VX	2.4225	14.535	cm^2/day
OF work HD	33.4	50.1	cm^2/day
OF work VX	0.9463	1.4195	cm^2/day
OF trans HD	16.7	100.2	cm^2/day
OF trans VX	0.47	2.839	cm^2/day
RF	1.00E−06	1.00E−06	m^−1
RfD est. subchron HD	7.00 E−05	7.00 E−05	mg HD/kg/d
RfD est. subchron VX	2.00 E−06	2.00 E−06	mg VX/kg/d
SA eyes	33.4	33.4	cm^2/event
SA trans exposed skin	2800	2800	cm^2/day
SA trans hand	15	15	cm^2/event
SA work exposed skin	5700	5700	cm^2/day
SA work hand	45	45	cm^2/event
SE	0.5	0.5	Unitless
THQ	1	1	Unitless
AT nc	365*ED	365*ED	Days

Table 10 Exposure parameter assumptions for significant HD and VX breakdown products incorporated into SRCL assessment.

Parameter	Estimated airport average	Estimated airport maximum	Units
ABSTDG	0.009	0.009	Unitless
ABSEMPA	0.084	0.084	Unitless
ABSMPA	0.084	0.084	Unitless
ABSEA2192	0.0	0.0	Unitless
DF trans child TDG	70	420	cm^2/day
DF trans child EMPA	70	420	cm^2/day
DF trans child MPA	70	420	cm^2/day
DF trans child EA2192	1.98	11.9	cm^2/day
FTSHSh TDG	0.5	0.5	Unitless
FTSHSh EMPA	0.5	0.5	Unitless
FTSHSh MPA	0.5	0.5	Unitless
FTSHSh EA2192	0.0018	0.0018	Unitless
FTSHSs TDG	0.1	0.1	Unitless
FTSHSs EMPA	0.1	0.1	Unitless
FTSHSs MPA	0.1	0.1	Unitless
FTSHSs EA2192	0.0152	0.0152	Unitless
FTSBSh TDG	0.25	0.25	Unitless
FTSBSh EMPA	0.25	0.25	Unitless
FTSBSh MPA	0.25	0.25	Unitless
FTSBSh EA2192	0.0009	0.0009	Unitless
FTSBSs TDG	0.05	0.05	Unitless
FTSBSs EMPA	0.05	0.05	Unitless
FTSBSs MPA	0.05	0.05	Unitless
FTSBSs EA2192	0.0076	0.0076	Unitless
IF trans TDG	85.5	513	cm^2/day
IF trans EMPA	85.5	513	cm^2/day
IF trans MPA	85.5	513	cm^2/day
IF trans EA2192	2.4225	14.5	cm^2/day
OF trans TDG	16.7	100.2	cm^2/day
OF trans EMPA	16.7	100.2	cm^2/day
OF trans MPA	16.7	100.2	cm^2/day
OF trans EA2192	0.47	2.839	cm^2/day
RfD est. subchron TDG	4.00E+00	4.00E+00	mg TDG/kg/d
RfD est. subchron EMPA	2.80E−01	2.80E−01	mg EMPA/kg/d
RfD est. subchron MPA	2.00E−01	2.00E−01	mg MPA/kg/d
RfD est. subchron EA2192	2.00E−06	2.00E−06	mg EA2192/kg/d
RfC est. subchron TDG	4.70E+00	4.70E+00	mg TDG/m^3
RfC est. subchron EMPA	3.40E−01	3.40E−01	mg EMPA/ m^3
RfC est. subchron MPA	2.40E−01	2.40E−01	mg MPA/ m^3
RfC est. subchron EA2192	0.00E+00	0.00E+00	mg EA2192/ m^3
Variables: See footnote to Table 9.

Figure 1 Airport transit passenger toddler SRCL estimate for VX (see Table 9 for CWA-specific parameters).

Figure 2 Airport employee and personnel SRCL for VX (see Table 9 for CWA-specific parameters).

Figure 3 Conceptual site model of potential exposure pathways evaluated.

Table 11 Estimated Sulfur Mustard and Agent VX Surface Removal Contaminant Levels (SRCLs) for child transit passengers. ^a

	Transit Passenger SRCL4 ^b ^, ^c	Transit Passenger SRCL24 ^b ^, ^d
CWA	Protective estimate (mg/cm^2 surface, continuous exposure)	Protective estimate (mg/cm^2 surface, continuous exposure)
Sulfur mustard (HD)	1.77 × 10^−3	2.95 × 10^−4
VX	1.85 × 10^−3	3.08 × 10^−4

Table 12 Estimated Sulfur Mustard and Agent VX Surface Removal Contaminant Levels (SRCLs) for adult airport employees and personnel. ^a

	Airport Employee/Personnel SRCL8 ^b ^, ^c	Airport Employee/Personnel SRCL12 ^b ^, ^d
CWA	Protective estimate (mg/cm^2 surface, continuous exposure)	Protective estimate (mg/cm^2 surface, continuous exposure)
Sulfur mustard (HD)	8.65 × 10^−3	5.77 × 10^−3
VX	9.56 × 10^−3	6.33 × 10^−3

Table 13 Estimated HD and VX Degradation Product Surface Removal Contaminant Levels (SRCLs) for child transit passengers. ^a

	Transit Passenger SRCL4 ^b ^, ^c	Transit Passenger SRCL24 ^b ^, ^d
CWA Degradation Product	Protective estimate (mg/cm^2 surface, continuous exposure)	Protective estimate (mg/cm^2 surface, continuous exposure)
TDG (thiodiglycol)	1.06 × 10^2	1.77 × 10^1
EMPA (ethyl methylphosphonic acid)	7.08	1.18
MPA (methyl phosphonic acid)	5.06	8.44 × 10^−1
EA2192	1.89 × 10^−3	3.15 × 10^−4

Table 14 Estimated contribution of each exposure route to Sulfur Mustard and Agent VX SRCLs for child transit passengers. ^a

CWA	Transit passenger 4-h dwell time (%)	Transit passenger 24-h dwell time (%)
Sulfur mustard (HD)	Ingestion: 79.1	Ingestion: 79.1
	Eye: 15.5	Eye: 15.5
	Dermal skin: 5.4	Dermal skin: 5.4
	Resuspension inhalation: <1	Resuspension inhalation: <1
VX	Ingestion: 81.7	Ingestion: 81.8
	Eye: 16.0	Eye: 16.0
	Dermal skin: 2.2	Dermal skin: 2.2
	Resuspension inhalation: 0.14	Resuspension inhalation: 0.07

Table 15 Estimated contribution of each exposure route to Sulfur Mustard and Agent VX SRCLs for adult airport employees and personnel. ^a

CWA	Airport employee/personnel 8-h workshift (%)	Airport employee/personnel 12-h workshift (%)
Sulfur mustard (HD)	Ingestion: 52.2	Ingestion: 52.3
	Eye: 32.3	Eye: 32.3
	Dermal skin: 15.5	Dermal skin: 15.4
	Resuspension inhalation: <1	Resuspension inhalation: <1
VX	Ingestion: 57.2	Ingestion: 56.9
	Eye: 35.4	Eye: 35.1
	Dermal skin: 6.6	Dermal skin: 6.6
	Resuspension inhalation: 0.74	Resuspension inhalation: 1.4

Table 16 Estimated contribution of each exposure route to Degradation Product SRCLs (mg/cm² of surface) for child transit passengers. ^a

CWA Degradation Product	Transit Passenger, 4-h dwell time (%)	Transit Passenger, 24-h dwell time (%)
TDG (thiodiglycol)	Ingestion: 83.0	Ingestion: 83.1
	Eye: 16.2	Eye: 16.2
	Dermal skin: 0.6	Dermal skin: 0.6
	Resuspension inhalation: <1	Resuspension inhalation: <1
EMPA (ethyl	Ingestion: 79.0	Ingestion: 79.1
methylphosphonic	Eye: 15.4	Eye: 15.4
acid)	Dermal skin: 5.43	Dermal skin: 5.44
	Resuspension inhalation: <1	Resuspension inhalation: <1
MPA (methyl	Ingestion: 79.0	Ingestion: 79.1
phosphonic acid)	Eye: 15.4	Eye: 15.4
	Dermal skin: 5.43	Dermal skin: 5.44
	Resuspension inhalation: <1	Resuspension inhalation: <1
EA 2192	Ingestion: 83.7	Ingestion: 83.7
	Eye: 16.3	Eye: 16.3
	Dermal skin: NA ^b	Dermal skin: NA ^b
	Resuspension inhalation: NA ^b	Resuspension inhalation: NA ^b

Table 17 Recommended clearance exposure guidelines for transit passengers as well as various airport employees and personnel for selected CWAs and TICs in air and on surfaces (airborne for inhalation/ocular exposure; percutaneous vapor for protective clothing breach with full respiratory protection; and surface residual for “toddler” transit passenger SRCLs). For use during clearance decision-making following chemical terrorist release of selected CWA or TIC compounds under the LAX remediation protocol.

	Reasonable Maximum	Alternative Re-entry	CWA Personnel	Transit Passenger	Transit Passenger
	Re-entry Screening	Screening Guidelines	Escape Guidelines	SRCL4 hr	SRCL24 hr
	Guidelines (mg/m^3)	(mg/m^3)	(mg/m^3)	(mg/cm^2 surface,	(mg/cm^2 surface,
			for 30-min	calculated; 4 h	calculated; 24 h
	<8-h duration	>8 but <24-h	percutaneous	continuous exposure	continuous exposure
CWA or TIC	exposure ^a	duration exposure ^b	exposure	duration)	duration)
Tabun (GA)	<0.0010	<0.0003	11.1	^c	^c
Sarin (GB)	<0.0010	<0.0003	6.0	^c	^c
Soman (GD) and Cyclosarin (GF)	<0.00050	<0.0002	1.5	^c	^c
VX	<0.000071	<0.000024	0.13	<1.85 × 10^−3	<3.08 × 10^−4
Sulfur mustard (H/HD)	<0.008	<0.003	0.1	<1.77 × 10^−3	<2.95 × 10^−4
Hydrogen cyanide (AC)	<1.1	<0.37	^d	^c	^c
Cyanogen chloride (CK)	<0.25	<0.08	^d	^c	^c
Phosgene (CG)	<0.08	<0.03	^d	^c	^c

Table 18 Recommended clearance exposure guidelines for incidental soil and drinking water ingestion of selected CWAs and TICs. ^a

	Residential soil (lifetime)		Industrial soil (lifetime)		15 liter/day consumption (<7 day)
	Preliminary	Risk-Based	Preliminary	Risk-Based	Drinking water
	Remediation Goal	Concentration	Remediation Goal	Concentration (RBC)	concentration
CWA or TIC	(PRG) (mg/kg)	(RBC) (est.) (mg/kg)	(PRG) (mg/kg)	(est.) (mg/kg)	(μg/liter)
Tabun (GA)	<2.8 (est.)	<3.1	<68 (est.)	<82	<46
Sarin (GB)	<1.3 (est.)	<1.6	<32 (est.)	<41	<9.3
Soman (GD) and Cyclosarin (GF)	<0.22 (est.)	<0.31	<5.2 (est.)	<8.2	<4 (GD only; also applicable for generic nerve agent)
VX	<0.042 (est.)	<0.047	<1.1 (est.)	<1.2	<5
Sulfur mustard (H/HD)	<0.01 (est.)	<0.55	<0.3 (est.)	<14	<47
Hydrogen cyanide (AC)	<1.6 × 10^3	Unavailable	<2.0 × 10^4	Unavailable	<2
Cyanogen chloride (CK)	<3.9 × 10^3	Unavailable	<5.1 × 10^4	Unavailable	Unavailable
Phosgene (CG)	Unavailable	Unavailable	Unavailable	Unavailable	Unavailable

Table 19 Summary of clearance exposure guidelines for principal CWA degradation products on surfaces (“toddler” transit passenger SRCL), and via incidental soil ingestion (both residential and industrial). ^a

			Residential soil	Industrial soil
	Transit Passenger	Transit Passenger		Outdoor Worker	Indoor Worker
	SRCL4 hr	SRCL24 hr	Preliminary	Preliminary	Preliminary
	Protective estimate	Protective estimate	Remediation	Remediation	Remediation
	(mg/cm^2 surface; 4 h	(mg/cm^2 surface; 24 h	Goal (PRG)	Goal (PRG)	Goal (PRG)
CWA Degradation Product	continuous exposure)	continuous exposure)	(mg/kg soil)	(mg/kg soil)	(mg/kg soil)
TDG (thiodiglycol)	1.06 × 10^2	1.77 × 10^1	2.4 × 10^4	6.0 × 10^4	8.2 × 10^5
EMPA (ethyl methylphosphonic acid)	7.08	1.18	1.7 × 10^3	4.2 × 10^3	5.7 × 10^4
MPA (methyl phosphonic acid)	5.06	8.44 × 10^−1	1.2 × 10^3	3.0 × 10^3	4.1 × 10^4
EA2192	1.89 × 10^−3	3.15 × 10^−4	4.7 × 10^−2	6.8 × 10^−1	1.2

DA (US Department of the Army) . 2004 . “ Nerve Agent Percutaneous Exposure Criteria and Airborne Exposure Levels (AELs) for GD, GF for Use in Interim DA Guidance on Implementation of the New AELs ” . Falls Church, VA, , USA : Memorandum. Office of the Surgeon General . June 29, 2004

 Google Scholar

Watson , A , Opresko , D M and Hauschild , V . 2003 . “ Evaluation of Chemical Warfare Agent Percutaneous Vapor Toxicity: Derivation of Toxicity Guidelines for Assessing Chemical Protective Ensembles. ORNL/TM-2003/180 ” . Oak Ridge, TN, , USA : Oak Ridge National Laboratory .

 Google Scholar

NIOSH (National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health) . 2003 . “ Pocket Guide to Chemical Hazards (Hydrogen Cyanide, p 168; Cyanogen Chloride, p 82; Phosgene, p 252) ” . Washington, DC, , USA : US Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, CDC, NIOSH, US Government Printing Office .

 Google Scholar

DA . 2008 . “ Toxic Chemical Agent Safety Standards. DA Pam 385-61 ” . Washington, DC, , USA : US Department of the Army, Headquarters, The Pentagon .

 Google Scholar

NRC/COT . 2003 . “ Nerve Agents; Sulfur Mustard ” . In Acute Exposure Guideline Levels for Selected Airborne Chemicals, vol 3 , respectively. Subcommittee on Acute Exposure Guideline Levels, Committee on Toxicology 15 – 300 . 301 – 83 . Washington, DC, , USA : The National Academies Press . Available at www.nap.edu

 Google Scholar

NRC/COT . 2002 . “ Phosgene; Hydrogen Cyanide ” . In Acute Exposure Guideline Levels for Selected Airborne Chemicals, vol 2 , respectively. Subcommittee on Acute Exposure Guideline Levels, Committee on Toxicology 15 – 70 . 211 – 76 . Washington, DC, , USA : The National Academies Press . Available at www.nap.edu

 Google Scholar

NRC/COT . 2001 . “ Standing Operating Procedures for Developing Acute Exposure Guideline Levels for Hazardous Chemicals. Subcommittee on Acute Exposure Guideline Levels, Committee on Toxicology ” . Washington, DC, , USA : National Academy Press . Available at www.nap.edu

 Google Scholar

Wood , C. 1997 . “ Acute Exposure Guideline Levels (AEGLs) for Cyanogen Chloride (CNCl), draft of June 1997. National Advisory Committee for Acute Exposure Guideline Levels for Hazardous Substances ” . Washington, DC, , USA : USEPA .

 Google Scholar

Opresko , D , Young , R Faust , R . 1998 . Chemical warfare agents: Estimating oral reference doses . Rev Environ Contam Toxicol , 156 : 1 – 183 .

 PubMedGoogle Scholar

Munro , N B , Talmage , S S Griffin , G D . 1999 . The sources, fate and toxicity of chemical warfare agent degradation products . Environ Health Perspect , 107 : 933 – 74 .

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Talmage , S S , Munro , N B Watson , A P . 2007a . “ The fate of chemical warfare agents in the environment ” . In Chemical Warfare Agents: Toxicology and Treatment, 2nd edit , Edited by: Marrs , T C , Maynard , R L and Sidell , F R . 89 – 125 . Chichester, West Sussex, , England : John Wiley and Sons Ltd. .

 Google Scholar

Opresko , D M , Young , R A Watson , A P . 2001 . Chemical warfare agents: Current status of oral reference doses . Rev Environ Contam Toxicol , 172 : 65 – 85 .

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

NRC/COT (National Research Council, Committee on Toxicology) . 1999 . “ Review of the U.S. Army's Health Risk Assessment for Oral Exposure to Six Chemical Warfare Agents. COT Subcommittee on Chronic Reference Dose for Chemical Warfare Agents, Committee on Toxicology ” . Washington, DC, , USA : National Academy Press . Available at www.nap.edu

 Google Scholar

Bakshi , K S , Pang , S NJ and Snyder , R . 2000 . Review of the Army's health risk assessments for oral exposure to six chemical-warfare agents . J Toxicol Environ Health Part A , 59 : 281 – 526 .

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

USEPA/IRIS (US Environmental Protection Agency, Integrated Risk Information System) . 1993 . “ Hydrogen Cyanide (CASRN 74-90-8) ” . Available at http://www.epa.gov/iris/index.html

 Google Scholar

USEPA/IRIS . 2005 . “ Chlorine Cyanide (CASRN 506-77-4) ” . Available at http://www.epa.gov/iris/index.html

 Google Scholar

Talmage , S S , Watson , A P Hauschild , V . 2007b . Chemical warfare agent degradation and decontamination . Current Organic Chemistry , 11 : 285 – 98 .

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Reddy , G , Major , M A and Leach , G J . 2005 . Toxicity assessment of thiodiglycol . Int J Toxicol , 24 : 435 – 42 .

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Capacio , B R , Smith , J R Gordon , R K . 2008 . “ Clinical detection of exposure to chemical warfare agents ” . In Chemical Warfare Agents: Chemistry, Pharmacology, Toxicology and Therapeutics, 2nd edit , Edited by: Romano , J A , Lukey , B J and Salem , H . 501 – 48 . Boca Raton, FL, , USA : CRC Press .

 Google Scholar

Bausum , H , Reddy , G and Leach , G . 1999 . “ Primary breakdown products of chemical agents ” . In Derivation of Health-Based Environmental Screening Levels for Chemical Warfare Agents: A Technical Evaluation, Appendix F , F-1 – F-19 . Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD, , USA : US Army Center for Health Promotion and Preventive Medicine .

 Google Scholar

USACHPPM (U.S. Army Center for Health Promotion and Preventive Medicine) . 1999 . “ Derivation of Health-Based Environmental Screening Levels for Chemical Warfare Agents: A Technical Evaluation ” . Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD, , USA : US Army Center for Health Promotion and Preventive Medicine .

 Google Scholar

OASA (Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Army) . 1999 . “ Derivation of Health-Based Environmental Screening Levels (HBESL) for Chemical Warfare Agents. Memorandum signed by Raymond J. Fatz, Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Army, May 28, 1999 ” . Washington, DC, , USA : Department of the Army, Office of the Assistant Secretary (Environment, Safety, and Occupational Health), Army Pentagon .

 Google Scholar

Watson , A and Dolislager , F . 2007 . “ Reevaluation of 1999 Health-Based Environmental Screening Levels (HBESLs) for Chemical Warfare Agents. ORNL/TM-2007/080 ” . Oak Ridge, TN, , USA : Oak Ridge National Laboratory .

 Google Scholar

USEPA . 2008 . “ U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Regions 3, 6, and 9. Regional Screening Levels for Chemical Contaminants at Superfund Sites ” . Available at http://www.epa.gov/reg3hwmd/risk/human/rb-concentration_table/index.htm

 Google Scholar

USEPA . 2004b . “ Users’ Guide and Background Technical Document for USEPA Region 9's Preliminary Remediation Goals (PRG) Table ” . Available at http://www.epa.gov/reg3hwmd/risk/human/rb-concentration_table/usersguide.htm

 Google Scholar

USEPA . 2005 . “ Region 9 Preliminary Remediation Goals (PRGs), 2004 Table ” . Available at http://www.epa.gov/region09/waste/sfund/prg/index.html

 Google Scholar

DA . 2005b . “ Sanitary Control and Surveillance of Field Water Supplies. Technical Bulletin TB-MED 577 ” . Washington, DC, , USA : US Department of the Army Headquarters .

 Google Scholar

DA . 2010 . “ Sanitary Control and Surveillance of Field Water Supplies. Technical Bulletin TB-MED 577/NAVMED P-5010-10/AFMAN 48-138_IP ” . Washington, DC, , USA : Headquarters, Departments of the Army, Navy and Air Force .

 Google Scholar

Michel , H O , Epstein , J Plapinger , R R . 1962 . “ EA 2192: A Novel Anticholinesterase. CRDLR 3135 ” . Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD, , USA : US Army Chemical and Research Laboratories, Army Chemical Center .

 Google Scholar