6.2 Report Prepared for New Zealand Vietnam Veterans Association - 1994

During 1994, following appointment by Vietnam Veterans Association of New Zealand [VVANZ ], a report was prepared for that Association in order to negotiate with Hon Warren Cooper, Minister in Charge of War Pensions, on Vietnam veterans non-conventional war injuries, such as certain medical conditions attributed to Agent Orange exposure.

The appointment of Victor R Johnson to prepare the report was caused by:

• Australian Government acceptance of certain medical conditions as attributable to Vietnam service.
• Denial by successive New Zealand Governments of such recognition.
  
  The report is shown below.
  
  

  Introduction

  This report is an update following appointment by Vietnam Veterans Association of New Zealand [VVANZ ] [to negotiate with Hon Warren Cooper, Minister in Charge of War Pensions, on Vietnam veterans non-conventional war injuries such certain medical conditions attributed to Agent Orange exposure. The appointment was caused by: Australian Government acceptance of certain medical conditions as attributable to Vietnam service. Denial by successive New Zealand Governments of such recognition. I have over 14 years experience with the health issues arising from Agent Orange, both nationally and internationally. This includes primary responsibility for the Agent Orange Class Action Suit in the early 1980's, and being a serving member of the New Zealand Agent Orange Trust Board responsible for the disbursement of the funds awarded to New Zealand veterans. In 1990 a visit to the USA was funded entirely by US citizens concerned that justice be seen to be done for their veterans. I was a guest in Washington DC for release of the Agent Orange Scientific Task Force report on Agent Orange, a report I distributed in New Zealand, including government ministers and parliamentary opposition members. The report listed many diseases and disorders as being statistically significant with Agent Orange exposure. I also attended Congressional Sub-Committee hearings into the Disability Benefits Bill for treatment and compensation for US veterans suffering certain diseases such as cancers attributable to service in Vietnam.

  
  

  US Disability Benefits Bill 1991

  The US Disability Benefits Bill 1991, was passed by a 412-0 vote in the House of Representatives, and a 99-0 Senate vote. The Bill provided for the National Academy of Sciences [NAS] to determine whether other medical conditions were caused by Agent Orange and other herbicides. The Department of Veterans Affairs was expected to give great weight to the findings and make veterans suffering from any of the conditions eligible for service-connected disability benefits.

  In announcing the compensation for non-Hodgkin's lymphoma sometime prior to the Bill being passed, US Veterans Administration Department Secretary, Mr E Derwinski, said the decision was his with support of President Bush and shouldn't be seen as a scientific decision. In concluding Derwinski also said: ' Those veterans who will now be compensated are most deserving of our care and concern. It is my hope that this action will help to begin to mend the divisiveness and controversy that has surrounded this issue for many years.'

  Australian Review of National Academy of Sciences Report

  The Australian Government provided a framework in 1991, for treatment and compensation to its Vietnam veterans with non-Hodgkin's lymphoma and soft tissue sarcoma, accepting these cancers as being attributable to service in Vietnam. A committee appointed by the Australian Government reviewed the NAS report. The committee's Veterans and Agent Orange: Health Effects of Herbicides' report produced in October this year established a link between Agent Orange and certain medical conditions that include: non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma Hodgkin's Disease Multiple myeloma Leukemia Lung Larynx Trachea cancer Chloracne Soft Tissue Sarcoma Porphyria Cutanea Cardia

  Full acceptance of the report by the Australian Government means that more than 600 known cancer-stricken veterans are deemed eligible for disability treatment and payments. The Australian Minister of Veterans' Affairs, Con Sciacca, said the committee's report was a landmark document to be developed into medical Statements of Principles to provide mechanism for Vietnam veterans to lodge claims that take into account the report findings. The report contradicts the findings of the 1985 Australian Royal Commission on Use and Effects of Chemical Agents on Australian Personnel in Vietnam that there was no causal relationship between exposure to Agent Orange and health disorders including cancers. The findings were highly criticised at the time by the scientific community and Vietnam veterans as being seriously flawed. The New Zealand Government and its agents consistently emphasised the Royal Commission findings to deny compensation and treatment for most types of medical conditions now accepted in Australia and the USA. Many veterans have experienced the denial in War Disability Pension applications.

  Australian Royal Commission 1985 Report

  Representation over fourteen years to the various governments in New Zealand and ministers of the day always brought forth response there was no cause and effect relationship. Reference was continually made to the Australian Royal Commission findings. On the release of the Commissions report Justice Evatt said: ' So Agent Orange is not guilty . . . no-one lost; this is not a matter for regret but for rejoicing. Veterans have not been poisoned. This is good news and it is the commission's fervent hope that it will be shouted from the rooftops.'

  The Commission's final conclusions were based on material available and evidence placed before it at the time of its inquiry. As Justice P Evatt said '...science is a progressing discipline'. In addressing the Agent Orange controversy in the United States at the time, the Commission's report includes a brief overview of major industrial events. Two major industrial studies were conducted after explosions at Monsanto's US Nitro plant, and the BASF plant in Germany, where employees were exposed to 2,4,5-T and dioxin. Monsanto manufactured 2,4,5-T from 1948 to 1969 and supplied it to the US Defence Department as a component of Agent Orange and other defoliants during the war in South Vietnam. Monsanto's study results have been used by scientists world-wide as evidence that chloracne is the only effect from exposure to 2,4,5-T/2,3,7,8-TCDD.

  
  

  Fraudulent and Manipulated Scientific Studies Report

  There was controversy over the role of Monsanto in the Commission as well as the Commissioner's treatment of some epidemiological scientists who made submissions. The controversy was re-ignited in 1990 by sworn testimony in the Kemner et al. court case [USA] in which Monsanto was defendant. The case was the longest jury trial in US legal history, started in the St Clair County of Illinios during 1984. An award of $16.25 million punitive damages was made against Monsanto. Dr Frank Dost, Monsanto's Toxicologist in the United States, who testified during the trial, assisted the Australian Royal Commission as a part time consultant. The trial related to a chemical spill by Monsanto at Sturgeon, Missouri. The plaintiffs lawyers tendered evidence, confirmed in cross-examination, showing Monsanto had falsified, manipulated and concealed study results. Evidence also showed the company had been selling dioxin-contaminated chlorophenol products for nearly 30 years. Sworn testimony during the Illinios trial indicates that for over thirty years Monsanto Chemical Company manipulated, falsified and concealed study results that showed 2,3,7,8-TCDD, a contaminant of 2,4,5-T manufacture, is harmful to human health. Analysis of Monsanto's data from one study established that the true results should have been: Cancer deaths, 65% higher than expected Lung cancer deaths, 143% higher than expected Genitourinary cancer deaths, 108% Bladder cancer death rate, 809% Lymphatic cancer death rate, 92% Death from heart disease, 37%

  Mr Rex Carr, legal counsel for Kemner et. al., wrote to Mr John Moller explaining Monsanto Chemical Company's response in the Appellate Court. Mr Carr, of Carr, Korein, Tillery, Kunin, Montroy, Glass & Bogard, Attorneys at Law, Louis, Illinios, said: 31 '...I was surprised to read in the letters written by the New Zealand Monsanto representative that my charges have already been rejected by the court and are not supported by the scientific evidence. This is another lie which joins the long list of lies to which we have been subjected by Monsanto. No court has ever rejected the charges and Monsanto, itself, was unable to respond to any of the charges in court although Monsanto had a year and a half in which so to do. The charges which I made in court and which are supported by the documentary evidence and sworn testimony of Dr. Roush have never been rebutted. In point of fact, the Appellate Court case was recently argued before a panel of three judges and I repeated the same charges of fraud in the course of the argument. Monsanto's attorney made absolutely no effort to defend Monsanto against these charges. The jury in the original trial did obviously find that my clients had been unable to prove that their health was jeopardised by the dioxin exposure because of the very low levels of dioxin involved in the chemical. However, the $16,250,000 punitive verdict was a direct finding of the jury that Monsanto had committed fraud. It may be that for several technical reasons, the Appellate Court will some day reverse the punitive damage verdict, the effect of that verdict cannot be reversed. In a long and hotly contested trial, a jury of twelve American citizens found that Monsanto had lied and had wilfully failed to remove dioxins from its chemical and that it should be punished for so doing.' Monsanto Chemical Company has not rebutted the charges of fraud since February 1990, when they became widely reported by many sources.

  
  

  New Zealand Government Historical Denial

  No recognition has ever been given to New Zealand veterans adverse health conditions being attributable to Agent Orange exposure, as qualified in a report to parliament in 1990. REPORT OF THE FOREIGN AFFAIRS AND DEFENCE COMMITTEE REPORT: On the Inquiry Into the Manufacture of Agent Orange by Ivon-Watkins Dow in New Zealand During the Period of the Vietnam War. Reported to the New Zealand House of Representatives, Second Session, Forty Second Parliament, 1990. The report says, in part: '6 ...Studies in the United States and in the Australia on the alleged effects of Agent Orange on Vietnam Veterans have failed to produce any conclusive links between Agent Orange and the health of Vietnam veterans or their children. This was also the conclusion of the Australian Royal Commission on Agent Orange [1985] under Mr Justice Evatt. The then New Zealand Minister of Defence Hon F D O'Flynn wrote to the Vietnam Veterans in January 1985 stating that "there is no scientific evidence to support the contention that exposure to Agent Orange has caused any long-term health problems for veterans or their children".7

  In the Agent Orange class action suit in the United States an out-of-court settlement was made in 1984 in favour of United States, Australian and New Zealand veterans. This did not constitute an admission of liability by the seven chemical manufacturers who supplied Agent Orange to the United States armed forces. The companies made the settlement in order to resolve what they judged could otherwise be a long and costly court case. The conclusion of the presiding judge stated "the scientific data available to date makes it highly unlikely that except for those who have had chloracne [a skin complaint], any plaintiff could legally prove any causal relationship between Agent Orange and any other injury including birth defects '. The report also comments that: "...compensation is already available to former servicemen for injuries and illness arising from war service through the War Pensions Board, Those who feel they have a claim, whether or not from Agent Orange, may request assistance from the Board.'

  
  

  New Zealand Vietnam Veteran Mortality Rate

  New Zealand government denial, or avoidance acceptance, that there is cause for concern has prevailed for 14 years, in spite of a significant veteran death rate from some of the rarest forms of cancers. Had the death rate from such cancers been among the female gender in this country, or within the population anywhere else in the world, there would have great alarm and action. This is not to be for New Zealand Vietnam veterans. For example, the expected death rate from soft tissue sarcoma is 4:100,000. The mortality rate of New Zealand veterans from combined causes is currently between 12%-14% with no central record of causation.

  From my personal knowledge I estimate mortality due to cancers such as soft tissue sarcoma to be at least 50% of the total mortality rate. This is a statistically significant mortality rate for a population group that has not yet reached an average age of 50 years. There seems to be no valid explanation for the indifference in New Zealand to the mortality rate and causation. The Australian government recently launched a mortality rate study among its veteran population.

  
  

  Request to Minister In Charge of War Pensions

  On release of the Australian report and acceptance of certain cancers and other health disorders being attributable to Vietnam service a request was made to Hon Warren Cooper, Minister in Charge of War Pensions, that: 1] A statement of medical principle be made relative to treatment and compensation for the ten types of cancers. 2] A framework and resources be established to facilitate the treatment and compensation of New Zealand Vietnam veterans for specified cancers.

  A national framework and resources will target eligible veterans, provide for ongoing needs, and eliminate barriers or hurdles within the health system. Compensating an eligible veteran in a monetary sense and not facilitating treatment expeditiously will not achieve a health objective. Furthermore, anyone incapacitated through employment-related disease or injury is suffering loss of income earning potential.

  
  

  Response From Minister In Charge of War Pensions

  The reply from the Hon Warren Cooper, Minister in Charge of War Pensions was that: " ...the New Zealand war pensions legislation covering awards of disablement pensions to members of the Forces who served overseas in a war or emergency is considered liberal, in that it is merely necessary to establish that the disablement occurred or arose whilst the serviceman was overseas, and not that it was directly attributable to service." The reply also referred"...The Government does not formally acknowledge, therefore, that service in Vietnam is the only qualification needed to sustain an application for war disablement pension in respect of any form of cancer or for any other disability. The law requires that each application be decided on the individual circumstances of the case.

  The Australian Government has recently announced that a link between Agent Orange and 10 types of cancer has been accepted. However New Zealand War pensions have already been granted for many of those cancers. Entitlement is decided on the basis of medical reports and opinions from specialist medical examiners who are kept up to date with the current worldwide research and conclusions. The fact is that a Vietnam veteran is at liberty to apply for a pension for any form of disablement, and if it can be established that the disablement occurred or arose during service overseas then it acceptable as pensionable. It is not, nor has it ever been, necessary to issue a general determination in respect of certain types of disablement, nor to await such a determination from an overseas authority"

  
  

  Determinations Based on Overseas Authority

  Documentation of war pension application proceedings show categorically that weight has been, and is still given, to determination of overseas authorities. It only takes two examples to demonstrate the Minister Cooper's reply is not in accordance with facts. Example 1 [Circa 1990]: The following text is in relation to a war pension applicants appeal against declines of a claim. Each of the decisions declined the claims on the grounds that there appeared no causal link accepted by research. One statement follows in relation to an appeal: ... in offering a second opinion, commented [inter alia]: I enclose Abstracts from this research, you will see that this question was looked at by the Evatt Royal Commission in Australia. Although not everyone agreed with the findings of the Royal Commission, my understanding, reading these Abstracts, is that the Commission did not feel that veterans were at an increased risk of malignancy as a result of being exposed to Agent Orange. It is possible that further data will come to hand in the future, but I believe that at the present time there is insufficient evidence to support an association between Agent Orange and malignancy.

  Example 2 [Circa 1991: This example relates to an appeal against a War Pension Claims Panel decision in respect of lymphocyte cancer, usually incurable and as proved to be in this particular case "...It was said that this disability could have had its primary cause in service in Vietnam, but the Claims Panel determined that the condition could not be accepted as due to service. It noted that specialist evidence indicated that the condition was possibly due to late effect of defoliants but decided that this cause had not yet been proved or accepted..." Non-Hodgkin's lymphoma is a relatively uncommon cancer with an overall risk for males of about 1:10,000. 38 veterans stricken with non-Hodgkin's lymphoma were known to the Australian Department of Veterans affairs in 1990, a statistically significant figure for about 52,000 personnel from all arms of the military who served in Vietnam.

  Recommendations

  The reply from the Minister in Charge of War Pensions is inconsistent with experiences of veterans claiming war pensions for the types of medical conditions accepted by Australia. The Minister's response is also inconsistent in respect of reliance by War Pension Claims Panels on determination of overseas authorities.

  1. A New Zealand Vietnam veteran suffering certain medical conditions as accepted by Governments of Australia and the United States of America proceed with a war disability pensions claim, and pursue full entitlements to compensation and benefits. The medical conditions include: non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma Hodgkin's Disease Multiple myeloma Leukemia Lung Larynx Trachea cancer Soft Tissue Sarcoma Chloracne Porphyria Cutanea Cardia

  2. A spouse or immediate next-of-kin of a deceased veteran undertake an appeal against any war disability pensions claim previously dismissed where the claim was in relation to certain medical conditions accepted by Governments of Australia and the United States of America, and pursue full entitlements to compensation and benefits. The medical conditions include: non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma Hodgkin's Disease Multiple myeloma Leukemia Lung Larynx Trachea cancer Soft Tissue Sarcoma Chloracne Porphyria Cutanea Cardia

  3. A spouse or immediate next-of-kin of a deceased veteran undertake a war disability pensions claim if the veteran's death was attributable to certain medical conditions accepted by Governments of Australia and the United States of America, and pursue full entitlements to compensation and benefits. The medical conditions include: non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma Hodgkin's Disease Multiple myeloma Leukemia Lung Larynx Trachea cancer Soft Tissue Sarcoma Chloracne Porphyria Cutanea Cardia

  4. The Government undertake a mortality and health study of Vietnam veterans.

  Recommendation 3 requires pursuance as, to the best of my knowledge, it is without precedent. Under common law, prior to 1972, a citizen could take civil proceedings against another party following a death for negligent actions that contributed to such death. Military service personnel are barred from such action, hence the War Pensions Act. Typically, the spouse and/or children of a deceased veteran: who had not made any war disability pension claim, and whose death was attributable to the cancers accepted by the Australian and United States Governments. are being denied rights and benefits as provided in the War Pensions Act when the veteran's death is attributed to active service. Minister Cooper's response effectively means a veteran suffering the types of medical conditions accepted by Australia rather than conventional war injury has to establish proof that the medical conditions are attributable to service. Not a helpful situation when the former employer was responsible for placing an individual in the position to contract such medical conditions invoked by the military allies. Victor R Johnson 3 December 1994

  
  

  AGENT ORANGE SYNOPSIS

  1965-1972 Agent Orange and other herbicides aerially sprayed in South Vietnam to defoliate the vegetation for the purposes of denying the enemy cover. 1979 Concerns in the USA about the forms of cancers afflicting Vietnam veterans and deformities among their off-spring. 1980 Class Action law suit commenced in the US by veterans against herbicide manufacturing companies that supplied components to the US Government for use in South Vietnam. 1981 New Zealand veterans join the US Class Action suit. 1984 Out-of-court settlement of $180 million, largest ever payment of its kind at that time. 1985 Australian Royal Commission reports that service in Vietnam "has not and will not cause cancer". New Zealand Agent Orange Trust Board established by Trust Deed. 1990 Australian Administrative Appeals Tribunal finds there is reasonable hypothesis that death of a veteran from a rare from of cancer was caused by exposure to chemicals in Vietnam and his widow is entitled to compensation. Australian veterans afflicted with non-Hodgkin's lymphoma receive disability allowance after US research finds veterans are 50 percent more likely to have the disease. Agent Orange Scientific Task Force report is released. 1991 US House of Representatives approves Bill guaranteeing permanent disability benefits to veterans suffering exposure to Agent Orange. 1992 Australian Appeals Tribunal upholds an earlier judgement that a veteran's rare form of brain tumour was caused by exposure in Vietnam to herbicides and pesticides. Australian Appeals Tribunal also finds that cancers diagnosed in two veterans could be attributed to chemicals that include Agent Orange. 1993 US Department of Veterans Affairs accepts two cancers as being attributed to service in Vietnam. 1994 The Australian Federal Government accepts clear links between Agent Orange and cancer after independent report overturns finding of the Evatt Royal Commission. New Zealand Minister in Charge of War Pensions says Government will not formally acknowledge service in Vietnam as the only qualification needed to sustain an application for war disablement pension in respect of any form of cancer or any other form of disability. The Minister also advised that the law requires each application be decided on the individual circumstances of the case. It is not, nor has it ever been, necessary to issue a general determination in respect of certain types of disablement, nor, to await such a determination from an overseas authority.

  6.3 Soft Tissue Sarcoma

  Soft tissue sarcomas are a group of different types of malignant tumors which arise from body tissues such as muscle, fat, blood and lymph vessels and connective tissues (that is, distinct from hard tissue such as bone or cartilage). These tumors are relatively rare.
  
  The possibility that exposure to phenoxy herbicides, such as Agent Orange, may have caused rare forms of cancer in humans such as soft tissue sarcomas was suggested in 1979 and 1981 by small scale studies conducted in Sweden. These studies showed that persons reporting occupational exposure to phenoxy herbicides may have a 5 to 6 fold higher risk of developing soft tissue sarcomas as compared to persons without such exposure.
  
  The United States of America Department of Veterans currently presumes that, resulting from exposure to herbicides like Agent Orange:
  
  Soft-tissue sarcoma (other than osteosarcoma, chondrosarcoma, Kaposi's sarcoma, or mesothelioma).
  
  The USA law requires that some of these diseases be at least 10% disabling under VA's rating regulations within a deadline that began to run the day you left Vietnam. If there is a deadline, it is listed in parentheses after the name of the disease.
  
  

  6.4 Other Health Disorders Accepted for USA Veterans

  The other health disorders accepted for USA veterans as attributable to exposure to Agent Orange in some case have a time qualification. There is risk that a veteran could be seriously disadvantaged by a time frame due to:

• Failing to seek medical treatment
• Misdiagnosis of a condition
• Self-treatment over many years

7.0 TREATMENT OF UNCONVENTIONAL WAR INJURIES

7.1 Health Diseases or Disorders Acceptance

The basis of acceptance for treatment of unconventional war injuries for New Zealand Vietnam veterans is that USA and Australian governments accept their troops were exposed in III Corp in particular. Both of those countries have taken action in the interests of their veterans. New Zealand has not.

New Zealand troops were an integral part of Australian forces.

Battalion Unit books are suffice as evidence, particularly those with tour of duty operational maps inserted.

In the past denial to accept diseases and health disorders suffered by New Zealand Vietnam veterans has been the fall back to the War Disabilities Pensions Act as being liberal by comparison, in that onus of disproof is on the Crown. Whilst that may be so for conventional injury from military service, it is not so for exposure to chemicals such as defoliants.

The Veterans Affairs Office steps in with criterion of cannot judicially determine a case-by-case basis for unconventional war injury without a Schedule of accepted health diseases and disorders.

7.2 Defining Health Diseases and Disorders for Treatment Purposes

It is contended that to ensure subjectiveness does not override science and common sense, the War Pensions Act 1954, needs to reflect accepted health diseases and disorders in an appropriate Section.

A Schedule to such a Section in the War Pensions Act 1954, would define the diseases and disorders accepted as unconventional service related injuries.

The provision would ensure certain diseases and health disorders would be immediately treated as required.

Victor R Johnson
31 English Street
Hamilton
New Zealand
v.r.Johnson@xtra.co.nz
[07] 849 9982

Supplementary Papers

The supplementary papers that were presented included an email from the researcher for the New Zealand Vietnam veterans website listing the deceased.

The other was the Stellman and Stellman report concerning the further 10% increase of defoliation within the III Corp Zone; The Extent and Usage Patterns of Military Herbicides in Vietnam, 1961-1971: A Reanalysis Based on Examination of Newly Analyzed Primary Source Materials

A. Deceased Veterans Stastistics

The statistics for deceased New Zealand Vietnam veterans is 15.3% of a 3256 population. Diagram 1-4 shows the email received on 25 November 2003.

B. Spray in III Corp increased 10% The following supplementary paper was presented to the Select Committee on the day. The Extent and Usage Patterns of Military Herbicides in Vietnam, 1961-1971: A Reanalysis Based on Examination of Newly Analyzed Primary Source Materials 1 Jeanne Mager Stellman*, Steven D. Stellman*, Richard Christian § , Tracy Weber*, Carrie Tomasallo*, Andrew Stellman ¥ *Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University, § Military Consultant, ¥ Foundation for Worker, Veteran and Environmental Health INTRODUCTION Herbicides were used as one weapon of war in an operational program known as Traildust that was run collaboratively by the governments of the United States and South Vietnam. Military operations carried out by United States Air Force personnel were known as Operation Ranch Hand. Spraying of herbicides in Operation Ranch Hand was primarily carried out by (C-123) fixed-wing aircraft. Helicopters were sometimes used and South Vietnamese personnel participated in some missions. A small percentage of all herbicides was dispensed by American and South Vietnamese army units and in some naval operations, particularly around the perimeter of military installations. Every mission carried out by Operation Ranch Hand belonged to an Air Force Project which contained one or more specific targets. Each project and each target within a project was subjected to lengthy series of South Vietnamese and American military and civilian committee reviews before it was approved. The approval process could take as long as one year. The National Academy of Sciences (NAS) has already described the approval process 2 . Examination of the background documents available to the NAS reveals that they were not provided with the working files documenting each Project. (This is understandable given that the NAS Committee was in session and issued its reports while the War was being conducted.) We have had the opportunity to examine all Air Force documentation on Operation Ranch Hand Projects that are held in the US National Archives. In this presentation we provide a summary of data on the specific active targets that were sprayed in Vietnam during the years 1961-1971. METHODS As part of our work for the National Academy of Sciences, we have carried out extensive quality control and updating of the HERBS files. The NAS had originally estimated about a 10% error rate in the files. We confirmed this rate and corrected most of the errors. Much of our work involved reference to original source documents, particularly the DAARS reports: Daily Air Activities Reports, which were produced by the Air Force for each mission flown. Close examination of the DAARS led us to seek more information on Operation Ranch Hand projects, which we located at the US National Archives in College Park, Maryland. We read each of the Folders and electronically scanned the detailed target maps which contained over 400 individual targets. Using map digitizing software and a light pencil, each target was traced and its longitude and latitude derived.3 Where maps were no longer present in the folders we extracted the written specific coordinates of all approved targets and translated the coordinates from the military UTM system to longitude and latitude. A SQL database was designed, an identification system for all targets and projects developed, and database tables created. In other aspects of our work for the National Academy of Sciences we have developed a geographic information system, GIS, for the southern portion of Vietnam which comprises 176,060 grids with boundaries 0.01º longitude and 0.01º latitude apart. The gridpoint identifier serves as the index key for each of the database tables. Our next task was to identify the specific grids “contained” within each target. We used a point-in-polygon algorithm to determine whether the centerpoint of each grid was “inside” or “outside” each target. The gridpoint key of each of the “contained” grids was entered into a containment table in the database, and linked to appropriate target identifier. Analyses were carried out to derive basic statistics on the extent of target containment and spraying. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION One hundred twenty-eight Projects, comprising 540 requested targets have been identified from the archived records. Many targets overlapped each other as part of separate Projects with separate tactical objectives, and some targets were approved but not sprayed. More than 475 targets were sprayed at least once and most were sprayed at least twice to achieve the military defoliation or crop destruction purpose. Figures 1-3 show the targets found. Figure 1 illustrates more than 400 individual targets throughout the Republic of Vietnam and portions of Cambodia. The most heavily sprayed area of the country was located in III Corps Tactical Zone which included the capital, Saigon, and the waterways which connected it with the South China Sea. Figure 2 shows III Corps targets in greater detail, and Figure 3 shows a number of individual waterway targets in the area most proximate to the coastline, as well as nearby highway targets. We have used our GIS system to identify the correspondence between targets and actual herbicide spraying, and have calculated the acreage covered, the extent of overlap and the dates during which targets were active. The target areas, activity dates and estimated exposure opportunity scores provide an independent exposure measure that may be more tractable and comprehensible for population and ecological studies than a system based on calculations drawn from modeling nearly 25,000 individual spray points. We propose that these targets can serve as a exposure measure, similar to the three-zone system used in Seveso. 1 Supported by the US National Academy of Sciences (subcontract NAS-VA-5124-98-001). 2 National Research Council Committee on the Effects of Herbicides in South Vietnam. The Effects of Herbicides in South Vietnam: Part A. Washington, DC: National Academy of Sciences, 1974. 3 R2V raster to vector conversion software (Able Software Corp, Inc., Lexington, Massachusetts) Copyright, all rights reserved. Website created by Victor Johnson, 26 November 2003.