DOCSLIB.ORG

Chloroarsenicals Interim AEGL Document

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Chloroarsenicals Interim AEGL Document Interim 1: 11/2007 INTERIM ACUTE EXPOSURE GUIDELINE LEVELS (AEGLs) FOR ADAMSITE (CAS Reg. No. 578-94-9) (DM) ETHYLDICHLOROARSINE (CAS Reg. No. 598-14-1) (ED) METHYLDICHLOROARSINE (CAS Reg. No. 593-89-5) (MD) PHENYLDICHLOROARSINE (CAS Reg. No. 696 -28-6) (PD) DIPHENYLCHLOROARSINE (CAS Reg. No. 712-48-1) (DA) Interim 1:11/2007 1 PREFACE 2 Under the authority of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) P. L. 92-463 of 1972, the 3 National Advisory Committee for Acute Exposure Guideline Levels for Hazardous Substances 4 (NAC/AEGL Committee) has been established to identify, review and interpret relevant toxicologic and 5 other scientific data and develop AEGLs for high priority, acutely toxic chemicals. 6 AEGLs represent threshold exposure limits for the general public and are applicable to 7 emergency exposure periods ranging from 10 minutes to 8 hours. Three levels — AEGL-1, AEGL-2 and 8 AEGL-3 — are developed for each of five exposure periods (10 and 30 minutes, 1 hour, 4 hours, and 8 9 hours) and are distinguished by varying degrees of severity of toxic effects. The three AEGLs are defined 10 as follows: 11 AEGL-1 is the airborne concentration (expressed as parts per million or milligrams per cubic 12 meter [ppm or mg/m3]) of a substance above which it is predicted that the general population, including 13 susceptible individuals, could experience notable discomfort, irritation, or certain asymptomatic, 14 non-sensory effects. However, the effects are not disabling and are transient and reversible upon 15 cessation of exposure. 16 AEGL-2 is the airborne concentration (expressed as ppm or mg/m3) of a substance above 17 which it is predicted that the general population, including susceptible individuals, could experience 18 irreversible or other serious, long-lasting adverse health effects or an impaired ability to escape. 19 AEGL-3 is the airborne concentration (expressed as ppm or mg/m3) of a substance above which it 20 is predicted that the general population, including susceptible individuals, could experience 21 life-threatening health effects or death. 22 Airborne concentrations below the AEGL-1 represent exposure levels that could produce mild 23 and progressively increasing but transient and nondisabling odor, taste, and sensory irritation or certain 24 asymptomatic, non-sensory effects. With increasing airborne concentrations above each AEGL, there is a 25 progressive increase in the likelihood of occurrence and the severity of effects described for each 26 corresponding AEGL. Although the AEGL values represent threshold levels for the general public, 27 including susceptible subpopulations, such as infants, children, the elderly, persons with asthma, and 28 those with other illnesses, it is recognized that individuals, subject to unique or idiosyncratic responses, 29 could experience the effects described at concentrations below the corresponding AEGL. CHLOROARSENICALS Interim 1: 11/2007 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS 2 PREFACE ......................................................................... 3 3 LIST OF TABLES................................................................... 6 4 LIST OF FIGURES.................................................................. 5 5 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY............................................................ 8 6 1. INTRODUCTION ............................................................... 15 7 2. HUMAN TOXICITY DATA....................................................... 19 8 2.1. Acute Lethality .......................................................... 19 9 2.2. Nonlethal Toxicity ....................................................... 19 10 2.2.1. Case Reports .................................................... 19 11 2.2.2. Epidemiology Studies............................................. 25 12 2.2.3. Other.......................................................... 25 13 2.3. Developmental/Reproductive Effects ......................................... 25 14 2.4. Genotoxicity............................................................ 25 15 2.5. Carcinogenicity .......................................................... 25 16 2.6. Summary............................................................... 25 17 3. ANIMAL TOXICITY DATA....................................................... 26 18 3.1. Acute Lethality .......................................................... 26 19 3.1.1. Monkeys ....................................................... 26 20 3.1.2. Dogs .......................................................... 28 21 3.1.3. Rats........................................................... 31 22 3.1.4. Mice .......................................................... 32 23 3.1.5. Rabbits ........................................................ 34 24 3.1.6. Guinea Pigs..................................................... 36 25 3.1.7. Swine ......................................................... 38 26 3.1.8. Goats.......................................................... 39 27 3.1.9. Cats........................................................... 39 28 3.2. Nonlethal Toxicity ....................................................... 40 29 3.2.1. Monkeys ....................................................... 40 30 3.3. Developmental/Reproductive Effects ......................................... 42 31 3.4. Genotoxicity............................................................ 43 32 3.5. Carcinogenicity .......................................................... 43 33 3.6. Summary............................................................... 43 34 4. SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS ..................................................... 45 35 4.1. Metabolism and Disposition ................................................ 45 36 4.2. Mechanism of Toxicity.................................................... 45 37 4.3. Structure-Activity Relationships............................................. 45 38 4.4. Other Relevant Information ................................................ 45 39 4.4.1. Species Variability .............................................. 45 40 4.4.2. Concentration-Exposure Duration Relationship ........................ 45 3 CHLOROARSENICALS Interim 1: 11/2007 1 5. DATA ANALYSIS FOR AEGL-1 ................................................... 45 2 5.1. Human Data Relevant to AEGL-1 ........................................... 45 3 5.2. Animal Data Relevant to AEGL-1 ........................................... 46 4 5.3. Derivation of AEGL-1 .................................................... 47 5 6. DATA ANALYSIS FOR AEGL-2 ................................................... 49 6 6.1. Human Data Relevant to AEGL-2 ........................................... 49 7 6.2. Animal Data Relevant to AEGL-2 ........................................... 49 8 6.3. Derivation of AEGL-2 .................................................... 50 9 7. DATA ANALYSIS FOR AEGL-3 ................................................... 52 10 7.1. Human Data Relevant to AEGL-3 ........................................... 52 11 7.2. Animal Data Relevant to AEGL-3 ........................................... 52 12 7.3. Derivation of AEGL-3 .................................................... 52 13 8. SUMMARY OF AEGLs........................................................... 56 14 8.1. AEGL Values and Toxicity Endpoints ........................................ 56 15 8.2. Comparisons with Other Standards and Guidelines.............................. 57 16 8.3. Data Adequacy and Research Needs .......................................... 59 17 9. REFERENCES .................................................................. 60 18 APPENDIX A: Derivation of AEGL Values ............................................. 65 19 APPENDIX B: Time Scaling Calculations ............................................... 88 20 APPENDIX C: Category Plots for Chloroarsenical AEGLs.................................. 92 21 APPENDIX D: Derivation Summary for Chloroarsenical AEGLs............................. 96 4 CHLOROARSENICALS Interim 1: 11/2007 1 LIST OF TABLES 2 Table 1. Nomenclature of Chloroarsenical Agents......................................... 16 3 Table 2. Chemical And Physical Data for Adamsite (DM)................................... 16 4 Table 3. Chemical And Physical Data for Diphenylchloroarsine (DA).......................... 17 5 Table 4. Chemical And Physical Data for Ethyldichloroarsine (ED) ........................... 17 6 Table 5. Chemical And Physical Data for Methyldichloroarsine (PD).......................... 18 7 Table 6. Chemical And Physical Data for Phenyldichloroarsine (PD) .......................... 18 8 Table 7. Response of Human Volunteers to Inhalation of DM................................ 20 9 Table 8. Estimation of Intolerable Exposure Concentrations for Adamsite (DM) ................. 21 10 Table 9. Response of Human Volunteers to Inhalation of DM................................ 22 11 Table 10. Results of Tolerance Studies on Human Volunteers Exposed to DM. .................. 23 12 Table 11. Effects of Acute Exposure of Monkeys to Adamsite (DM) Aerosols ................... 26 13 Table 12. Lethal Response in Monkeys Exposed to Adamsite (DM) Aerosol .................... 27 14 Table 13. Lethality in Monkeys Following Acute Inhalation Exposure to Adamsite (DM) .......... 27 15 Table 14. Acute Lethality of Dogs Following 30-Minute Inhalation 16 Exposure to Adamsite (DM) ............................................. 28 17 Table 15. Lethal Response in Dogs Exposed to Adamsite (DM) Aerosol.......................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Regulated Substance List
    INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE UNIFIED PROGRAM (UP) FORM REGULATED SUBSTANCE LIST CHEMICAL NAME CAS # TQ Listing CHEMICAL NAME CAS # TQ Listing (Lbs) Basis (Lbs) Basis Acetaldehyde 75-07-0 10,000 g Cantharidin 56-25-7 100/10,0001 * Acetone Cyanohydrin 75-86-5 1,000 Carbachol Chloride 51-83-2 500/10,0001 Acetone Thiosemicarbazide 1752-30-3 1,000/10,0001 Acetylene (Ethyne) 74-86-2 10,000 f Carbamic Acid, Methyl-,o- Acrolein (2-Propenal) 107-02-8 500 b (((2,4-Dimethyl-1,3-Dithiolan- Acrylamide 79-06-1 1,000/10,0001 2-YL) Methylene)Amino)- 26419-73-8 100/10,0001 Acrylonitrile (2- Propenenitrile) 107-13-1 10,000 b Carbofuran 1563-66-2 10/10,0001 Acrylyl Chloride Carbon Disulfide 75-15-0 10,000 b (2-Propenoyl Chloride) 814-68-6 100 b Carbon Oxysulfide Aldicarb 116-06-3 100/10,0001 (Carbon Oxide Sulfide (COS)) 463-58-1 10,000 f Aldrin 309-00-2 500/10,0001 Chlorine 7782-50-5 100 a,b Allyl Alcohol (2-Propen-1-ol) 107-18-6 1,000 b Chlorine Dioxide Allylamine (2-Propen-1-Amine) 107-11-9 500 b (Chlorine Oxide (ClO2)) 10049-04-4 1,000 c Aluminum Phosphide 20859-73-8 500 Chlorine Monoxide (Chlorine Oxide) 7791-21-1 10,000 f Aminopterin 54-62-6 500/10,0001 Chlormequat Chloride 999-81-5 100/10,0001 Amiton Oxalate 3734-97-2 100/10,0001 Chloroacetic Acid 79-11-8 100/10,0001 Ammonia, Anhydrous 2 7664-41-7 500 a,b Chloroform 67-66-3 10,000 b Ammonia, Aqueous Chloromethyl Ether (conc 20% or greater) 7664-41-7 20,000 a,b (Methane,Oxybis(chloro-) 542-88-1 100 b * Aniline 62-53-3 1,000 Chloromethyl Methyl Ether Antimycin A 1397-94-0 1,000/10,0001 (Chloromethoxymethane)
    [Show full text]
  • Transport of Dangerous Goods
    ST/SG/AC.10/1/Rev.16 (Vol.I) Recommendations on the TRANSPORT OF DANGEROUS GOODS Model Regulations Volume I Sixteenth revised edition UNITED NATIONS New York and Geneva, 2009 NOTE The designations employed and the presentation of the material in this publication do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the Secretariat of the United Nations concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area, or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. ST/SG/AC.10/1/Rev.16 (Vol.I) Copyright © United Nations, 2009 All rights reserved. No part of this publication may, for sales purposes, be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, electrostatic, magnetic tape, mechanical, photocopying or otherwise, without prior permission in writing from the United Nations. UNITED NATIONS Sales No. E.09.VIII.2 ISBN 978-92-1-139136-7 (complete set of two volumes) ISSN 1014-5753 Volumes I and II not to be sold separately FOREWORD The Recommendations on the Transport of Dangerous Goods are addressed to governments and to the international organizations concerned with safety in the transport of dangerous goods. The first version, prepared by the United Nations Economic and Social Council's Committee of Experts on the Transport of Dangerous Goods, was published in 1956 (ST/ECA/43-E/CN.2/170). In response to developments in technology and the changing needs of users, they have been regularly amended and updated at succeeding sessions of the Committee of Experts pursuant to Resolution 645 G (XXIII) of 26 April 1957 of the Economic and Social Council and subsequent resolutions.
    [Show full text]
  • Decontamination of Agent Yellow, a Lewisite and Sulfur Mustard Mixture
    EPA 600/R-14/436 | March 2015 | www.epa.gov/research Decontamination of Agent Yellow, a Lewisite and Sulfur Mustard Mixture Office of Research and Development National Homeland Security Research Center Decontamination of Agent Yellow, a Lewisite and Sulfur Mustard Mixture Evaluation Report National Homeland Security Research Center Office of Research and Development U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Research Triangle Park, NC 27711 ii Disclaimer The United States Environmental Protection Agency through its Office of Research and Development’s National Homeland Security Research Center funded and managed the research described here under EPA Contract Number EP-C-10-001, Work Assignment Number 4-28 with Battelle. This report has been peer and administratively reviewed and has been approved for publication as an Environmental Protection Agency report. It does not necessarily reflect views of the Environmental Protection Agency. No official endorsement should be inferred. The Environmental Protection Agency does not endorse the purchase or sale of any commercial products or services. Questions concerning this document or its application should be addressed to: Lukas Oudejans, Ph.D. Decontamination and Consequence Management Division National Homeland Security Research Center Office of Research and Development U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (MD-E343-06) 109 T.W. Alexander Drive Research Triangle Park, NC 27711 Phone: 919-541-2973 Fax: 919-541-0496 E-mail: [email protected] iii Acknowledgments The following individuals are acknowledged
    [Show full text]
  • Scientific Advisory Board
    OPCW Scientific Advisory Board SAB-III/1 27 April 2000 Original: ENGLISH REPORT OF THE THIRD SESSION OF THE SCIENTIFIC ADVISORY BOARD 1. Introduction 1.1 The Scientific Advisory Board (hereinafter referred to as the “Board”) held two meetings during its third session, which took place from 14 - 16 December 1999 and from 15 - 16 March 2000 in The Hague. 1.2 Dr Claude Eon of France, the Chairman of the Board, presided over its proceedings. 1.3 The Board considered the following issues: (a) adamsite; (b) analytical procedures; (c) equipment issues; (d) destruction technologies; (e) bio-medical samples; (f) future contributions of the Board to the preparation of the first Review Conference; and (g) any other business. 1.4 In preparation for its meeting the Board had received reports from its temporary working groups (TWGs) on adamsite and analytical procedures, and a report on a joint meeting of the temporary working groups on equipment issues and on chemical weapons destruction technologies. 1.5 During its meeting in December 1999, the Board received a briefing by the Deputy Director-General on the status of implementation of the Convention and on work priorities. The Board was also briefed by staff from the Verification and Inspectorate Divisions on experiences with the conduct of different types of inspection, as well as on analytical and equipment-related matters. It was further briefed on the results of an expert meeting on bio-medical samples conducted by the Secretariat in December 1999. CS-2000-1867 SAB-III/1 page 2 2. Work on substantive issues Adamsite 2.1 The Board received and discussed the draft report of the TWG on adamsite dated 7 October 1999, noted additional comments, and decided to include in its report the following considerations in relation to this matter: 2.2 Adamsite (10-chloro-5,10-dihydro-phenarsazine, code name DM, CAS registry number 578-94-9) is a yellow-green crystalline solid with a boiling point of 410ºC and a melting point of 195ºC.
    [Show full text]
  • Copyrighted Material
    1 Historical Milieu 1.1 Organophosphorus Nerve Agents 2 1.2 Blister Agents 5 1.3 Sternutator Agents 11 1.4 Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC) 13 1.4.1 Schedule of Chemicals 14 1.4.2 Destruction of Chemical Weapons 14 References 16 COPYRIGHTED MATERIAL Analysis of Chemical Warfare Degradation Products, First Edition. Karolin K. Kroening, Renee N. Easter, Douglas D. Richardson, Stuart A. Willison and Joseph A. Caruso. © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Published 2011 by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. 2 ANALYSIS OF CHEMICAL WARFARE DEGRADATION PRODUCTS 1.1 ORGANOPHOSPHORUS NERVE AGENTS Organophosphorus (OP) type compounds, that is, deriva- tives containing the P=O moiety, were first discovered in the 1800s when researchers were investigating useful applica- tions for insecticides/rodenticides. There are many derivatives of organophosphorus compounds, however, the OP deriva- tives that are typically known as ‘nerve agents’ were discov- ered accidentally in Germany in 1936 by a research team led by Dr. Gerhard Schrader at IG Farben [1–4]. Schrader had noticed the effects and lethality of these organophosphorus compounds towards insects and began developing a new class of insecticides. While working towards the goal of an improved insecticide, Schrader experimented with numerous phosphorus-containing compounds, leading to the discovery of the first nerve agent, Tabun (or GA) (Figure 1.1). The potency of these insecticides towards humans was not realized until there was yet another accident, which involved a Tabun spill. Schrader and coworkers began experiencing symptoms, such as miosis (constriction of the pupils of the eyes), dizziness and severe shortness of breath, with numerous effects lasting several weeks [1, 4, 5].
    [Show full text]
  • Warfare Agents for Modeling Airborne Dispersion in and Around Buildings
    LBNL-45475 ERNEST ORLANDO LAWRENCE BERKELEY NATIn NAL LABORATORY Databaseof Physical,Chemicaland ToxicologicalPropertiesof Chemical and Biological(CB)WarfitreAgentsfor ModelingAirborneDispersionIn and AroundBuildings TracyThatcher,RichSextro,andDonErmak Environmental Energy Technologies Division DISCLAIMER This document was prepared as an account of work sponsored by the United States Government. While this document is believed to contain correct information, neither the United States Government nor any agency thereof, nor The Regents of the University of Catifomia, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of anY information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by its trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise, does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommend at i on, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof, or The Regents of the University of California. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof, or The Regents of the University of California. Ernest Orlando Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory is an equal opportunity employer. DISCLAIMER Portions of this document may be illegible in electronic image products. Images are produced
    [Show full text]
  • Critical Evaluation of Proven Chemical Weapon Destruction Technologies
    Pure Appl. Chem., Vol. 74, No. 2, pp. 187–316, 2002. © 2002 IUPAC INTERNATIONAL UNION OF PURE AND APPLIED CHEMISTRY ORGANIC AND BIOMOLECULAR CHEMISTRY DIVISION IUPAC COMMITTEE ON CHEMICAL WEAPON DESTRUCTION TECHNOLOGIES* WORKING PARTY ON EVALUATION OF CHEMICAL WEAPON DESTRUCTION TECHNOLOGIES** CRITICAL EVALUATION OF PROVEN CHEMICAL WEAPON DESTRUCTION TECHNOLOGIES (IUPAC Technical Report) Prepared for publication by GRAHAM S. PEARSON1,‡ AND RICHARD S. MAGEE2 1Department of Peace Studies, University of Bradford, Bradford, West Yorkshire BD7 1DP, UK 2Carmagen Engineering, Inc., 4 West Main Street, Rockaway, NJ 07866, USA *Membership of the IUPAC Committee is: Chairman: Joseph F. Burnett; Members: Wataru Ando (Japan), Irina P. Beletskaya (Russia), Hongmei Deng (China), H. Dupont Durst (USA), Daniel Froment (France), Ralph Leslie (Australia), Ronald G. Manley (UK), Blaine C. McKusick (USA), Marian M. Mikolajczyk (Poland), Giorgio Modena (Italy), Walter Mulbry (USA), Graham S. Pearson (UK), Kurt Schaffner (Germany). **Membership of the Working Group was as follows: Chairman: Graham S. Pearson (UK); Members: Richard S. Magee (USA), Herbert de Bisschop (Belgium). The Working Group wishes to acknowledge the contributions made by the following, although the conclusions and contents of the Technical Report remain the responsibility of the Working Group: Joseph F. Bunnett (USA), Charles Baronian (USA), Ron G. Manley (OPCW), Georgio Modena (Italy), G. P. Moss (UK), George W. Parshall (USA), Julian Perry Robinson (UK), and Volker Starrock (Germany). ‡Corresponding author Republication or reproduction of this report or its storage and/or dissemination by electronic means is permitted without the need for formal IUPAC permission on condition that an acknowledgment, with full reference to the source, along with use of the copyright symbol ©, the name IUPAC, and the year of publication, are prominently visible.
    [Show full text]
  • Medicine with Deeper, More Biochemical Conception Of
    Edinburgh Medical Journal May 1951 APPLICATIONS of chemical defence research IN MEDICINET? By Professor R. A. PETERS to be invited It is a great responsibility, as well as a great honour, to Cameron lecturers give this lecture ; and I expect that with other I this ancient seat of share a sense of awe upon standing here in is learning. For me it is an awe tinged with much feeling (it possible that this is partly because some forebears of my mother came from near to recent of the this ; it is in part due the perusal city) perhaps " address here Froude in on the Times of John Knox, given by 1865 " " entitled Influence of the Reformation upon the Scottish Character ; this address drives home to the Sassenach the sterner stuff of which all of us in the the Scots are made ; but I really think it is more that as south, even if we come as I do from a Medical School as ancient the Hospital of St Bartholomew, know full well that Edinburgh stands high indeed in the world of Medical Schools as Scotland itself stands in the world of intellect. Elsewhere I have discussed fully the historical background of our for me back researches upon Chemical Defence substances, which go to World War I.23 Again in my Dixon lecture,24 I have indicated some of the interest for pharmacology. The outlook for medicine has not the been reviewed so far. Therefore I propose to-day to discuss of British influence upon the future of therapeutics of the discovery anti-lewisite and of some of the other researches upon war gas but substances ; and to consider not only the leads towards therapy, the possible newer trends given to medicine itself.
    [Show full text]
  • Report on Chemical Munitions Dumped in the Baltic Sea (HELCOM 1994)
    Baltic Sea Environment Proceedings No. 142 Baltic Marine Environment Protection Commission Chemical Munitions Dumped in the Baltic Sea Published by: HELCOM – Baltic Marine Environment Protection Commission Katajanokanlaituri 6 B FI-00160 Helsinki Finland www.helcom.fi Authors: Tobias Knobloch (Dr.), Jacek Bełdowski, Claus Böttcher, Martin Söderström, Niels-Peter Rühl, Jens Sternheim For bibliographic purposes this document should be cited as: HELCOM, 2013 Chemical Munitions Dumped in the Baltic Sea. Report of the ad hoc Expert Group to Update and Review the Existing Information on Dumped Chemical Munitions in the Baltic Sea (HELCOM MUNI) Baltic Sea Environment Proceeding (BSEP) No. 142 Number of pages: 128 Information included in this publication or extracts thereof are free for citation on the condition that the complete reference of the publication is given as stated above Copyright 2013 by the Baltic Marine Environment Protection Commission (HELCOM) ISSN 0357-2994 Language revision: Howard McKee Editing: Minna Pyhälä and Mikhail Durkin Design and layout: Leena Närhi, Bitdesign, Vantaa, Finland Chemical Munitions Dumped in the Baltic Sea Report of the ad hoc Expert Group to Update and Review the Existing Information on Dumped Chemical Munitions in the Baltic Sea (HELCOM MUNI) Table of Contents 1 Executive summary. .5 2 Introduction. .9 2.1 CHEMU report – subjects covered, recommendations & fulfilment. .10 2.2 MUNI report – scope & perspectives. 11 2.3 National and international activities since 1995. .14 2.3.1 Managerial initiatives. .14 2.3.2 Investigations in the Baltic Sea . .23 3 Chemical warfare materials dumped in the Baltic Sea. .28 3.1 Introduction. 29 3.1.1 Dumping activities .
    [Show full text]
  • Lewisite Fact Sheet
    Lewisite Fact Sheet HIGHLIGHTS: It is unlikely that the general population will be exposed to blister agents Lewisite or Mustard-Lewisite. People who breathe in vapors of Lewisite or Mustard-Lewisite may experience damage to the respiratory system. Contact with the skin or eye can result in serious burns. Lewisite or Mustard-Lewisite also can cause damage to bone marrow and blood vessels. Exposure to high levels may be fatal. Blister agents Lewisite and Mustard-Lewisite have not been found in any of the 1,585 National Priorities List sites identified by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). What are lewisite and mustard-lewisite? Lewisite is an oily, colorless liquid with an odor like geraniums. Mustard-Lewisite Mixture is a liquid with a garlic-like odor. Mustard-Lewisite is a mixture of Lewisite and a sulfur mustard known as HD. Lewisite might have been used as a chemical weapon by Japan against Chinese forces in the 1930s, but such reports have not been confirmed. Any stored Lewisite in the United States must be destroyed before April 2007, as mandated by the Chemical Weapons Convention. What happens to lewisite and mustard-lewisite when it enters the environment? • Blister agents Lewisite and Mustard-Lewisite could enter the environment from an accidental release. • In air, blister agents Lewisite and Mustard-Lewisite will be broken down by compounds that are found in the air, but they may persist in air for a few days before being broken down. • Lewisite and Mustard-Lewisite will be broken down in water quickly, but small amounts may evaporate. • Lewisite and Mustard-Lewisite will be broken down in moist soil quickly, but small amounts may evaporate.
    [Show full text]
  • Decision-Making in Chemical Warfare Agent (CWA) Response There Is a Lot of Fear Associated with Chemical Will Act Accordingly
    Application Note: 102 Decision-Making in Chemical Warfare Agent (CWA) Response There is a lot of fear associated with Chemical will act accordingly. If the first responders Warfare Agents (CWAs). The misnomer over-react and immediately jump into full “Nerve Gas” quickly brings horrible images to encapsulation protection it could panic the the minds of many civilians. But if we lay aside public and cause unnecessary worry and the politics and fear, CWA detection should even injury. treated like other gas/vapor detection challenges. It should be a collaborative Over Protection Can Be Dangerous process encompassing physical clues, threat to the Responder scenario, biological clues, and a variety of Heat stress is the number one injury in sensing technologies. No one clue or HazMat response and immediately jumping technology is always correct. Experience and into full Level A encapsulation is a good way the use of multiple clues and technologies are of overheating oneself. Level A the keys to successful CWA response. encapsulation also makes one much more Understanding what the clues are and how to susceptible to slip, trip and fall injuries. layer them to make a decision is critical to Finally, over protection makes it harder to get successful CWA response. things done. When properly used, detection allows responders to respond at lower levels Why is Gas Detection Important? of Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) to Responders cannot rely on their senses for provide the highest levels of safety to decision-making. Without effectively knowing themselves and to the community that they how to use detection techniques responders protect.
    [Show full text]
  • Warning: the Following Lecture Contains Graphic Images
    What the новичок (Novichok)? Why Chemical Warfare Agents Are More Relevant Than Ever Matt Sztajnkrycer, MD PHD Professor of Emergency Medicine, Mayo Clinic Medical Toxicologist, Minnesota Poison Control System Medical Director, RFD Chemical Assessment Team @NoobieMatt #ITLS2018 Disclosures In accordance with the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education (ACCME) Standards, the American Nurses Credentialing Center’s Commission (ANCC) and the Commission on Accreditation for Pre-Hospital Continuing Education (CAPCE), states presenters must disclose the existence of significant financial interests in or relationships with manufacturers or commercial products that may have a direct interest in the subject matter of the presentation, and relationships with the commercial supporter of this CME activity. The presenter does not consider that it will influence their presentation. Dr. Sztajnkrycer does not have a significant financial relationship to report. Dr. Sztajnkrycer is on the Editorial Board of International Trauma Life Support. Specific CW Agents Classes of Chemical Agents: The Big 5 The “A” List Pulmonary Agents Phosgene Oxime, Chlorine Vesicants Mustard, Phosgene Blood Agents CN Nerve Agents G, V, Novel, T Incapacitating Agents Thinking Outside the Box - An Abbreviated List Ammonia Fluorine Chlorine Acrylonitrile Hydrogen Sulfide Phosphine Methyl Isocyanate Dibotane Hydrogen Selenide Allyl Alcohol Sulfur Dioxide TDI Acrolein Nitric Acid Arsine Hydrazine Compound 1080/1081 Nitrogen Dioxide Tetramine (TETS) Ethylene Oxide Chlorine Leaks Phosphine Chlorine Common Toxic Industrial Chemical (“TIC”). Why use it in war/terror? Chlorine Density of 3.21 g/L. Heavier than air (1.28 g/L) sinks. Concentrates in low-lying areas. Like basements and underground bunkers. Reacts with water: Hypochlorous acid (HClO) Hydrochloric acid (HCl).
    [Show full text]