Agent Orange

I Corps - 2,355,322

Location	Orange	White	Blue	Total Gallons
A Shau	53,550	2,550	6,128	62,228
An Hoa	6,500	1,800	11,250	19,550
Binh Hoa	8,220	0	1,600	9,820
Cam Lo	80,375	8,660	12,785	101,820
Camp Carrol	78,200	5,400	5,050	88,650
Camp Eagle	14,250	0	0	14,250
Camp Esso	53,410	5,600	0	64,510
Camp Evans	18,690	0	880	19,570
Camp Henderson	68,155	7,040	4,800	79,995
Chu Lai	12,170	4,150	1,598	17,918
Con Thien	84,700	12,460	10,925	108,085
Da Nang, China Beach	13,800	0	2,000	15,800
Dong Ha	54,385	5,060	9,935	69,380
Duc Pho, LZ Bronco	46,225	14,400	1,175	61,800
Firebase Jack	140,875	11,900	3,280	156,055
Firebase Rakkassan	150,145	23,900	2,510	176,555
Firebase West	15,405	3,690	18,480	37,575
Hill 63	20,500	3,200	0	23,700
Hill 69	11,620	4,150	1,598	17,368
Hoi An	17,520	3,000	13,950	34,470
Hue	41,395	0	5,070	46,465
Khe Sanh, Firebase Smith	43,705	3,040	4,300	51,045
LangCo Bridge	50,610	5,600	3,500	59,710
LZ Baldy	15,430	3,000	13,950	32,380
LZ Dogpatch, Hill 327	4,490	0	8,250	12,740
LZ Geronimo	22,535	14,000	468	37,003
LZ Jane, Firebase Barbara	91,150	6,750	3,700	101,600
LZ Langley, Firebase Shepard	72,105	7,040	4,800	83,945
LZ Profess, Hill 55	39,300	13,000	17,209	69,509
LZ Rockcrusher, Hill 85	47,800	0	0	47,800
LZ Rockpile	110,050	15,440	7,650	133,140
LZ Ross	15,405	6,720	18,508	40,633
LZ Sandra	118,780	20,210	24,755	163,745
LZ Snapper, Firebase Leather	11,350	0	3,000	14,350
Marble, Hill 59	15,405	6,720	18,508	40,633
Phu Bai	54,300	3,000	120	57,420
Phu Luc, LZ Tommahawk	78,250	4,000	0	82,250
Quang Nai	25,605	0	1,800	27,405
Quang Tri, LZ Nancy	68,000	2,750	3,700	74,450
2,355,322

III Corps - 4,086,229

Location	Orange	White	Blue	Total Gallons
An Loc	77,000	79,830	0	156,830
Ben Cat	87,250	83,640	20,105	190,995
Ben Hoa	35,045	124,525	3,950	163,520
Cholon	320	0	0	320
Cu Chi	59,150	67,540	14,105	140,795
Dau Tieng (Michelin)	32,370	45,800	3,800	81,770
Dien Duc, Firebase Elaine	66,850	25,800	0	92,350
Duc Hoa	750	0	0	750
Firebase Di An	6,000	0	1,595	7,595
Firebase Frenzel	13,445	57,560	900	71,905
Firebase Jewel, LZ Snuffy	219,550	146,010	7,300	372,860
Firebase Mace	34,280	23,350	730	58,360
Katum	299,420	239,395	20,000	558,815
Lai Khe	57,120	22,300	1,800	81,220
Loc Ninh	46,660	103,710	1,800	152,170
Long Binh, Firebase Concord	13,445	57,560	0	71,005
LZ Bearcat	17,840	75,470	0	93,310
LZ Fish Nook	44,000	23,800	0	67,800
LZ Schofield	38,640	17,210	7,800	63,650
Nha Be (Navy Base)	119,725	121,925	6,000	247,650
Nui Ba Den, Firebase Carolin	50,020	66,500	2,100	118,620
Phouc Vinh	484,383	146,576	12,810	643,769
Phu Chong	39,848	62,230	12,055	114,130
Phu Loi	79,000	83,430	0	162,430
Qua Viet	50,610	5,600	3,500	59,710
Quan Loi	44,190	34,300	0	78,490
Saigon	No Data
Song Be	1,900	9,220	0	11,120
Tan Son Nhut	6,320	0	1,595	7,915
Tay Ninh	720	3,225	600	4,545
Trang Bang	32,365	39,560	6,000	77,925
Vo Dat, Firebase Nancy	14,180	29,100	0	43,280
Vung Tau	7,350	0	0	7,350
Xuan Loc	23,865	58,750	660	83,275
4,086,229

IV Corps - 669,534

Location	Orange	White	Blue	Total Gallons
Ben Luc	45,900	14,838	0	60,738
Ben Tre	24,800	24,750	0	49,550
Can Tho	15,160	13,915	11,685	40,760
Cao Lanh	1,875	2,935	830	5,640
Dong Tam	5,870	605	165	6,640
Firebase Grand Can(yon?)	0	1,540	0	1,540
Firebase Moore	9,820	0	0	9,820
Ham Long	3,275	1,620	0	4,895
Moc Hoa	12,400	6,590	0	18,990
My Tho	13,320	7,316	965	21,601
Nam Can	150,345	64,295	0	214,640
Phnom	0	184	0	184
Phu Quoc	19,000	0	0	19,000
Rach Gia	0	2,155	0	2,155
Seafloat	4,700	0	0	4,700
Soc Trang	3,410	2,391	1,280	7,081
Tan An	89,550	36,450	0	126,000
Tieu Con	8,700	0	0	8,700
Tra Vinh	9,885	8,000	0	17,885
Vinh Loi	30,010	0	0	30,010
Vinh Long	8,360	9,755	890	19,005
669,534

* Indicates some of the places that Casper Platoon flew missions to.

Note: This does NOT include US Army helicopter or ground applications, or any form of the insecticide programs by GVN, or the US military. The amount represents gallons within eight (8) kilometers of the area. Thus, each area is 9.6 miles in diameter.

Description	TCDD (Dioxin) Amounts
Agent Orange	1.77 to 40 ppm
Agent Blue (Purple)	32.8 to 45 ppm
Agent Red (Pink)	65.6 ppm
Agent White (Green)	65.6 ppm
Silvex	1 to 70 ppm
2,4,5-T (Current)	0.1 ppm or less

Background on Agent Orange

Agent Orange in South Vietnam

The jungles of South Vietnam were ideally suited for providing enemy cover for the guerilla tactics employed by troops battling South Vietnamese, American, and other allied forces during the Vietnam War. To offset ambush attacks and protect allied forces, the U.S. military sought to defoliate combat areas by developing and using the herbicide Agent Orange.

The defoliant — sprayed between 1965-1970 — was a 50/50 mixture of the herbicides 2,4,5-T and 2,4-D. U.S. military research developed Agent Orange, and the product was formulated based on military specifications.

Code named by the orange identification band painted on the 55-gallon storage drum, Agent Orange was usually sprayed from fixed wing C-123 military aircraft. The total amount of Agent Orange used during the Vietnam War herbicide program is estimated at approximately 11 million gallons.

The Development of Agent Orange

As a nation at war, the U.S. government compelled a number of companies to produce Agent Orange under the Defense Production Act. Companies supplying Agent Orange to the government included The Dow Chemical Company, Monsanto Company, Hercules Inc., Diamond Shamrock Chemicals Company, Uniroyal Inc., Thompson Chemical and T-H Agriculture and Nutrition Company.

Agent Orange was only manufactured for delivery to the U.S. government for military use. The product was never manufactured or sold for commercial purposes. After Agent Orange was manufactured and packaged as ordered by the U.S. government, the U.S. military took immediate and complete control of Agent Orange at the government contractors' manufacturing facilities in the U.S.

The U.S. military had sole control and responsibility for the transportation of Agent Orange to Vietnam , and for its storage once the defoliant reached Vietnam . The U.S. military controlled how, where, and when Agent Orange would be used.

Agent Orange and Dioxin

Much of the source of the resulting public controversy over Agent Orange was an unwanted trace impurity that was present in one of the product's ingredients. The unwanted contaminant was the dioxin compound 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-para-dioxin, commonly known as 2,3,7,8 or dioxin. It should be noted that dioxin was not a commercial product, but rather was an unavoidable manufacturing process contaminant in the 2,4,5-T process. Considerable controversy surrounds dioxin even today, primarily because of its high acute toxicity in animals. Dioxin has been shown to cause a number of serious conditions in laboratory animals, including birth defects and cancer. Dioxin's effects on humans, however, are not nearly so clear. Dioxin has been shown to cause a serious skin disorder known as chloracne and reversible signs of toxicity in workers accidentally exposed to extremely high levels on the job. In spite of the acknowledged toxicity to animals, there continues to be much scientific controversy and varying scientific opinion about what harm it may or may not have caused people — especially at the trace levels present in herbicides. Today, the scientific consensus is that when the collective human evidence is reviewed, it doesn't show that Agent Orange caused the veterans' illnesses.

It should also be noted that no increase in the risk of cancer has been observed among the most highly exposed veterans. Despite this, the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs accepts several "presumptively service-connected" diseases or conditions associated with Agent Orange exposure.

Agent Orange and the 1984 Class-Action Settlement

Beginning in 1978, hundreds of individual suits and class actions were brought in the U.S. on behalf of the 2.5 million veterans who served in Vietnam and their families against the companies that manufactured Agent Orange. Those lawsuits claimed that exposure to Agent Orange had caused a number of veterans to suffer a wide variety of illnesses. In time, these cases were consolidated before Federal Judge Jack Weinstein of the Eastern District Court in New York .

In May 1984, on the eve of the trial, Judge Weinstein facilitated a settlement between the companies and the veterans. As the Eastern District Court later explained, the plaintiffs were facing near-certain defeat. The veterans were unable to prove that Agent Orange was likely to cause any disease and they were unable to establish the level of any individual veteran's exposure to Agent Orange.

Despite the weakness of the plaintiffs' claims, defendants were willing to pay $180 million to settle the lawsuit to end years of potential litigation and globally resolve the issue for less the cost of defense. In addition, the settlement included all potential future Agent Orange claims. The district court then held a number of settlement hearings throughout the U.S. and approved the settlement as fair, reasonable and adequate.

Post 1984 Settlement

Since the 1984 Agent Orange settlement, all suits brought by veterans in the U.S. , including those who opted out of the class action settlement, had been routinely dismissed at the trial court level in favor of the manufacturers. For 17 years, U.S. appellate courts had upheld all such dismissals.

However, in November 2001, the U.S. 2nd Circuit Court reversed and remanded an Eastern District Court decision involving two plaintiffs — Joe Isaacson and Daniel Stephenson — who were seeking status outside the Agent Orange class action settlement. These plaintiffs argued that it would be unfair to enforce the settlement in their cases as they claim their illnesses were manifested after the 1984 settlement, and after the settlement funds were exhausted. Finally, these plaintiffs argued that their claims were unique and that they were inadequately represented in the 1984 class action settlement.

Left unchallenged, this ruling meant finality and certainty in the context of class action settlements could not be obtained and complex legal matters could never be fully resolved. Settlements are compromises intended to secure legal peace. This decision meant no settlement would ever be lasting and the mechanism of using class action settlements to end future claims would be lost. For this reason, the manufacturers who had previously settled this dispute in 1984 sought review by the U.S. Supreme Court. The Court granted the manufacturers' request with a hearing on February 26, 2003 and subsequent decision on June 9, 2003.

In the 4-4 split decision, the Supreme Court allowed a lower court ruling to stand that says a 1984 global settlement involving the companies the U.S. military asked to make Agent Orange during the Vietnam War does not bar a Vietnam veteran (Daniel Stephenson) from pursuing claims against those companies. The Court also vacated a second veteran's (Joe Isaacson) case and remanded the case to determine if it could be heard in U.S. Federal Court.

The case is now proceeding in the trial court, with U.S. District Court (Eastern District of New York ) Judge Jack Weinstein presiding.

Post 2003 Supreme Court Ruling

The Supreme Court ruling means that some veterans who claim they developed illnesses after the 1984 funds were exhausted may file claims against the manufacturers. It is important to note that the U.S. Supreme Court ruling was on a procedural matter concerning whether or not future claims of Agent Orange class members were barred from bringing any claims against the manufacturers versus a ruling on the merits of Agent Orange claims and the manufacturers' defenses. Isaacson and Stephenson claimed that they had never had the opportunity to benefit from the settlement and that their interests could not have been adequately represented when the settlement was negotiated. U.S. District Court (Eastern District of New York ) Judge Weinstein found that there was no real conflict of interest between presently injured class members and those who might develop injuries in the future because all such claims were without merit and would have been dismissed.

The Second Circuit Court concluded that the post-1994 (when the funds were exhausted) future claimants had not been adequately represented because the settlement "only provided for recovery for those whose death and disability was discovered prior to 1994." The Supreme Courts 4-4 split, in essence, failed to decide this case and allows the Second Circuit Court's decision to stand.

However, any new claims would be subject to dismissal under the government contract defense and on other legal grounds such as inability to prove causation. Judge Weinstein of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York has ruled in the past that the manufacturers are entitled to summary judgment on the government contract defense and the Court of Appeals has affirmed. The manufacturers are confident that this litigation will ultimately be dismissed.

In Conclusion

War damages people, lives, and the environment. Nations, and the militaries of nations, are responsible for war. The U.S. government and the Vietnamese government are responsible for military acts in Vietnam and the use of Agent Orange as a defoliant. The manufacturers feel that in 1984 they took part in a good-faith settlement aimed at healing and bringing closure to this issue. Any future issues involving Agent Orange should be the responsibility of the respective governments as a matter of political and social policy.

Agent Orange in Thailand ?	VIETNAM VETERANS AND AGENT ORANGE
Agent Orange In Korea	Cash-In on Agent Orange Benefits
AGENT ORANGE THE LAST BATTLE	VA'S AGENT ORANGE
Agent Orange Guam	Places AO was Stored
AO In Guam, Okinawa and Thailand	Places that Stored AO and Who Knew
AGENT ORANGE Outside of Vietnam, Canada:	Agent Orange Outside Vietnam, Panama
Air Force Admits Agent Orange Spraying at Eglin AFB, Florida	Determining Agent Orange Exposure
Diseases Associated With AO	Information on Prostate Cancer
Monsanto's Agent Orange	MORE Problems Caused by AGENT ORANGE
Tibbo's Agent Orange Site	Toxicspot Subic Bay
Veterans Exposed to Agent Orange	VA's guide on Agent Orange claims

NZ Admits Supplying Agent Orange During War	NAS Study of Persistance of Herbicides 201
NAS Study or Persistance of Herbicides 202	NAS Study of Persistance of Herbicides 203
Toxicspot Clark Air Force Base	M21-1MR Web Automated Reference Materials System
Bill to Add Cancers of the GI Tract	AO STORAGE, JOHNSTON ATOLL
KELLY REPORT, D.C. TRIP (AO.)