New Chemical Test Facility Planned for Edgewood Chemical

New Chemical Test Facility Planned for Edgewood Chemical Biological Center

Bio-Detector Challenge May Reveal Best Technology

Rapid Obscuration Systems; Not Just “Smoke and Mirrors”

The IPE Mannequin System

� Jan - Mar �008

Chem-Bio Defense Quarterly

U.S. Army Spc. Deonty Eastmon secures his sector during a patrol through Al Betra, Iraq, Nov. 26, 2007, as the rest of his squad asks local residents about recent insurgent activity. Eastmon is assigned to the 101st Airborne Division, 1st Battalion, 187th Infantry Regiment.U.S. Air Force photo by Tech. Sgt. Adrian Cadiz

Joint Project Manager Contamination Avoidance is the featured program this issue. The front cover shows a montage of JPM-CA developed and procured equipment.

Images of fallen service members are displayed at the Pentagon’s Hall of Heroes.

www.jpeocbd.osd.mil

JPEO-CBD

�

CONTENTS 4 Guest Columnist Col. Kyle Burke

Joint Project Manager Contamination Avoidance

5 Joint Chemical Agent Detector: One Detector Providing Multiple Capabilities to the Joint Warfighter

8 CBRNIAC Inquiry and Referral Services. Four hours of free assistance to CBRN Defense and Homeland Security Communities!

10 JBSDS Increment � Biological Standoff for �01� and Beyond

13 Morgan State Hosts Speakers From Federal Government

14 Chem-Bio Defense Quarterly Profile: Ms. Tracey Biggs

16 Vikki Henderson Accepts A Challenge and Excels

18 Chemical Simulant Decon Study: Path to Inexpensive Meth Decon?

20 The Common CBRN Sensor Interface Becomes a Reality

22 New Chemical Test Facility Planned for Edgewood Chemical Biological Center

24 Bio-Detector Challenge May Reveal Best Technology of Future

26 Rapid Obscuration Systems; Not Just “Smoke and Mirrors”

28 The IPE Mannequin System

30 ‘The Reason for Our Success is Our People’

page 5

page 10

page 14

page 18

page 24

Col. Kyle BurkeUSA

Col. Mark MalatestaUSA

Mr. Will HartzellUSMC

Mr. Scott WhiteUSN

Col. David WilliamsUSA

Mr. Rudolf OlszykUSMC

Mr. Stan EnatskyUSN

Col. Daniel BerryUSAF

� Jan - Mar 2008


The cover shows a new Stryker Nuclear, Biological and Chemical Reconnaissance Vehicle (NBCRV) in the Pentagon Courtyard. Army teams participated in a media day for the Stryker to introduce our newest chemical defense capability celebrated by a ceremony inside the Hall of Heroes. As quoted from Brig. Gen. Spoehr, the NBCRV “…is the most advanced and capable vehicle of its kind in the world. It represents a vast increase in capability over its predecessor, the Fox, in terms of accuracy, digital communication, stand-off sensing, speed, survivability, and lethality. It is a true leap ahead.” That celebration creates an appropriate moment to stop and think about the work we are all doing. How does this challenging statement fit your organization and your daily activities: “This (fill in your organization) exists for the sole purpose of delivering relevant operational capability to the Joint Warfighter. All actions – of all team members – shall support that one purpose and thought.” I invite you to take that one-step further, and make it

personal. Ask yourself – “What have I done today to deliver capability?” We carry that thought with us every day in the office of the Joint Project Manager for NBC Contamination Avoidance (JPM NBC CA). What does that mean? For us it means providing RELEVANT capability at a RELEVANT time. The office of the Project Manager for Nuclear, Biological and Chemical (NBC) Defense Systems was established at the Edgewood Area of Aberdeen Proving Ground over 20 years ago, in June 1987. In 2003, the Army Acquisition Executive (AAE) re-chartered the office as the Joint Project Manager for NBC Contamination Avoidance. Maintaining relevance required this office to change the organizational structure and the materiel solutions we develop to be able to respond to evolving technologies, threats, and time. Today, we are organized into four major teams: the Joint Product Manager for Reconnaissance and Platform Integration; and three Product Directors (PD) to include Point Chemical/Nuclear Detection; Systems Engineering and Standoff Detection; and Test Equipment, Strategy and Support (TESS). This issue of the Chem-Bio Defense Quarterly contains four articles discussing just a few of our current – RELEVANT - initiatives to deliver products and support to the Warfighter. The PD Point Chemical/Nuclear Detection article highlights the next generation point Chemical Warfare Agent (CWA) detector for the Joint Warfighter--the Joint Chemical Agent Detector or M4 JCAD. The handheld JCAD will augment and eventually replace the M8A1 Automatic Chemical Agent Alarm and M22 Automatic Chemical Agent Detector Alarm. Following a successful Full Rate Production decision; we will initiate deliveries in the next few months. The PD TESS provides a critical capability toward supporting Chem-Bio Defense system development, testing, and evaluation. Two of the many projects underway are highlighted. The first is a Chemical Agent Test Facility under design and construction at the Edgewood Chemical Biological Center (ECBC) to provide a significant step forward in the ability to conduct testing with chemical agents and other toxic materials of interest in a variety of environmental conditions. The facility is planned for completion in 2009. The second project highlights the Individual Protection Ensembles (IPE) Mannequin program which will deliver the latest technology robotics to Dugway Proving Ground, Utah for human factors testing on Individual Protection Equipment. Joint Project Manager NBC CA also manages the Army obscuration programs. This article presents a new hand-tossed smoke grenade--the Screening Obscuration Device Visual Restricted. It provides a new capability to expand the tactical use of smoke in urban warfare, counter-sniper, and close combat scenarios. Upon completion of testing, we project a successful Full Rate Production decision in February 2009. Delivering RELEVANT capability to the Joint Warfighter requires that we – the readers of this publication – work as a team. That is easy to say because in fact, we are one team – all of us within the JPMs, JPEO, the Services, the Department of Defense, Industry, and Academia. Together, we must work and collaborate to solve problems and deliver capability. Every team member is important to our success. We are obligated to recognize and understand the needs of our internal and external customers. This is important work, with a purpose of saving the lives of Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen and Marines. Our Warfighters deserve our very best.

Maj. Gen. Stephen V. Reeves

Joint Program Executive Officer

Mr. Douglas Bryce Deputy Joint Program Executive Officer

Mr. Scott Paris Chief of Staff

Col. Jonathan Newmark Assistant JPEO-CBD for Medical Affairs

Ms. Brenda Besore Director, Knowledge Management

Mr. Charlie Cutshall Director, Resource Management

Ms. Susan Hubbard Director, Management Support

Mr. Gary Olejniczak Director, Current Acquisition

Mr. Edward Wack Director, Future Acquisition

Mr. Darrell McCarthy Director, Human Resources

Mr. Larry Wakefield Special Assistant for External Affairs

Ms. Patricia Estep Webmaster

[email protected]

Editor, Chem-Bio Defense Magazine

Mr. Julius L. Evans [email protected]

Contractor Support Provided by Kalman & Co., Inc. and Camber Corporation

Mr. Stephen Gude Assistant Editor

[email protected]

Mr. Steven Lusher Senior Graphic Designer

[email protected]

Ms. Tonya Maust Graphic Designer

[email protected]

Ms. Ashlee Burns Graphic Designer

[email protected]

Ms. Jacqueline Grosser Distribution

[email protected]

Chem-Bio Defense Quarterly magazine is published quarterly by the Joint Program Executive

Office for Chemical and Biological Defense. Articles reflect the views of the authors and do

not necessarily represent the views of Chem-Bio Defense Quarterly, the Department of the Army or

the Department of Defense.

To contact the editorial office:

Call: (703) 681-0701 DSN: 588-9600

Fax: (703) 681-3439 Email: [email protected]

Articles should be submitted to:

Chem-Bio Defense Quarterly 5203 Leesburg Pike

Skyline 2, Suite 1609 Falls Church, VA 22041

www.jpeocbd.osd.mil

Guest Columnist: Col. Kyle Burke Joint Program Executive Office

Col. Kyle Burke Joint Project Manager,

Contamination Avoidance

www.jpeocbd.osd.mil

JPEO-CBD

�

The M4 Joint Chemical Agent Detector (JCAD) represents the next generation of point Chemi-

cal Warfare Agent (CWA) detectors for fielding to the Joint Services. But what exactly about the JCAD makes the system next generation? Is it that the JCAD will replace the M8A1 ACAA (Auto-matic Chemical Agent Alarm) and M22 ACADA (Automatic Chemical Agent Detector Alarm) as a CWA point detec-tor yet weighs 90 percent less at 1.5 pounds with batter-ies and is 95 percent smaller, taking up only 27 cubic inches? Is it that the JCAD will replace the CAM/ICAM (Chemical Agent Monitor/Improved Chemical Agent Monitor) for survey missions and provide simultaneous nerve and blister detection, as opposed to CAM/ICAM where switch-ing modes is necessary? Or is it because the JCAD will require approximately 25

percent less Operation and Support costs and has 50 percent lower procurement costs over the fielded M22 ACADA? Per-haps it is because the JCAD has no radio-active source and runs on common AA batteries for over 12 hours. The reason may be the JCAD is capable of detect-ing blood agents and Toxic Industrial Chemicals (TICs), a capability not seen in

any currently fielded handheld systems. Separately, these reasons represent a significant increment of capability and/or improvement over the fielded sensors, but

are nothing revolutionary. However, the Program Managers from the Joint Project Manager Nuclear Biological Chemical Contamination Avoidance (JPM NBC CA) were able to combine all these incre-mental improvements into one system and make the JCAD truly next generation. The Air Force initially conceptualized the JCAD as a personal and fixed site

CWA detector for Airmen. When the chemical and biological acquisi-tion program was restructured with a Joint focus, the JCAD was chosen to continue as a joint program. The JCAD program expanded to meet the requirements from several other small, handheld, monitor and survey detectors under development at

the time. In 2004, the Army’s JPM NBC CA took responsibility as lead devel-oper. As a result of a thorough market survey by the JPM NBC CA, the JCAD

By Joe Siegel, JCAD Team, JPM NBC CA

The JCAD program represents a novel approach to providing the next generation CWA point detectors and

will exceed the Warfighter’s immediate capability and expectations by providing a detector that is smaller, lighter, and less

costly with equal or greater capability over currently fielded systems.

� Jan - Mar �008


program was separated into two incre-ments, both of which would be based on commercially available systems. The 2004 market survey concluded that com-mercially available sensors represented a significant improvement over legacy systems to warrant acquisition of a first increment of JCAD. Utilizing a T&E downselect approach, the JPM NBC CA selected Smiths Detections Lightweight Chemical Detector (LCD) 3.2E as the most capable detector for Increment 1. Today’s Low Rate Initial Production (LRIP) M4 JCADs remain largely the same as the LCD 3.2Es procured in 2004, a testament to the detector’s capability to meet program requirements. The Increment 1 M4 JCAD is truly a unique piece of hardware. The M4 incorporates three detection modes, giving the M4 a “3 detectors in 1” capability. The first mode is “CWA 5 Second” mode, sometimes referred to as “standard” mode or “monitor” mode. In this mode the JCAD will monitor the air automatically for nerve, blister and blood agents and alert the user to relative dosage and hazard levels. The detector analyzes the vapor every 5 seconds to maximize battery life. This makes the JCAD ideal for fixed site operation, vehicle mounting, Modular Lightweight Load-carrying Equipment (MOLLE) attachment or any use where continuous monitoring is necessary. This mode provides operation very similar to the M22 ACADA. The second mode, “CWA 1 Second” mode, is sometimes referred to as “survey” mode. In this mode the JCAD operates similarly to the CAM/ICAM because of the quicker detec-tion cycles and addition of a nozzle exten-sion. This allows the JCAD user to pick an exact point to check for contamination and confirm the presence of agent quickly. In this mode, dosage and blood agent detection are eliminated since neither is relevant to operation in this manner. The third mode, TIC mode, also uses a 5 second detection cycle and targets several TICs. Through the use of a Platform Interface Kit (PIK), the JCAD adds several capabilities. These include running on 8-32 Volts DC power (such as from a vehicle), sending an M42 Alarm signal, data download to a computer and hard or soft mounting to a variety of platforms. A major milestone in the acquisition of the Increment 1 JCAD was the execution of a Multi-Service Operational Test and Evaluation (MOT&E). Developmen-

tal Testing (DT) such as CWA surety, Mil-Std-810F and Contamination Sur-vivability determine if the JCAD meets requirements, but how do you verify that those requirements meet the users’ needs? The answer is a well designed Operational Test (OT). All four services tested the JCAD for operational effective-ness during the main MOT&E event at Dugway Proving Ground (DPG). In July 2007, DPG personnel used CWA simu-lants for this test. For example, the Air

Force mounted the JCAD in a fixed site Threat Protection Grid (TPG) around an airfield which was attacked using simu-lants. The Army mounted the JCAD on M58 tracked vehicles and High Mobility Multi-Wheeled Vehicles (HMMWVs) during simulant releases to determine if the JCAD could adequately warn crews to take the necessary precautions. Through-out the MOT&E, Warfighters encountered simulants on a variety of missions. The Army Evaluation Center (AEC) will use

The JCAD is capable of detecting blood agents and Toxic Industrial Chemicals, capabili-ties not seen in currently fielded handheld detectors.

www.jpeocbd.osd.mil

JPEO-CBD

�

data from the MOT&E to determine if the JCAD is operationally effective and able to meet the user’s needs. Following that, the M4 JCAD will complete Full Rate Production (FRP) decision and then an Initial Operational Capability/First Unit Equipped (IOC/FUE) in April of 2008. Beyond the M4 JCAD, the JPM NBC CA began initial Test and Evaluation (T&E) of a second increment of JCAD, signifying another leap forward in chemi-cal detection to the Joint Warfighter. The JCAD Increment 2 incorporates all the features of Increment 1 with several notable additions. Increment 2 detects the nerve and blister agents at lower levels. Warfighters can take protective measures, such as donning MOPP gear, quicker in the presence of low concentrations of agent before the effects set in. In addi-tion, the JCAD will be able to discretely identify and quantify agents, i.e. the detector will indicate agent name and con-centration. Hence, where the M4 JCAD could only indicate a class of agent (G, H, blood, TIC) and a relative concentration (loosely tied to the number of bars dis-

played) the Increment 2 system gives an agent name (GA, GB, GD, GF, VX, HD, L, HN3, AC and CK) and concentration (i.e. 0.5 mg/m3). The system possesses advanced false alarm rejection giving it the capability to function on rotary wing aircraft and onboard naval ships, two environments that have historically caused high false alarm rates in point CWA detec-tors. The last major capability addition to JCAD is the ability to detect Non-Tra-ditional Agents (NTAs). Increment 2 is scheduled for Milestone C and Low Rate Initial Production (LRIP) in July 2009 and an FRP and IOC/FUE in August 2010 and June 2011, respectively. The JPM NBC CA is currently work-ing with representatives from the Joint Requirements Office (JRO), U.S. Army Center for Health Promotion and Preven-tive Medicine (CHPPM), and users from the Army, Navy, Air Force and Marines to determine what level of detection the Increment 2 JCAD will need. The team must consider several important factors in this discussion: cost, agent toxicity, sen-sitivity, and false alarms rate. In general,

the more sensitive a detector is, the higher the false alarm rate. Reducing false alarms on an overly sensitive system can become cost prohibitive. However, a less sensitive, more affordable system may not detect toxic concentrations of agent. The team will use the latest CHPPM toxico-logical data to ensure the JCAD sensitivity meets user requirements while minimizing both cost and false alarm rate. The JCAD program represents a novel approach to providing the next genera-tion CWA point detectors. It will exceed the Warfighters immediate capability and expectations by providing a detector that is smaller, lighter, and less costly with equal or greater capability over cur-rently fielded systems. The entire JCAD acquisition community is excited to be working on such an innovative and chal-lenging program and is eager to provide this significant increase in capability to the Warfighter.

Increment � of the JCAD will detect nerve and blister agents at lower levels. In the presence of low concentrations of agent, the user will be able to take protective action.

8


Jan - Mar �008

Let the Chemical, Biological, Radiological and Nuclear Defense Information Analysis Center (CBRNIAC) inquiry analysts do the searching, retrieval, and analysis – for data, programs, docu-

ments, equipment, research and development, design and engineering concepts, agents and decontaminants, and any topic that falls within the CBRNIAC scope. Take advantage of up to four free hours of CBRNIAC Inquiry staff services to help you find and analyze the information you need. As one of 19 U.S. Department of Defense (DoD)-sanc-tioned Information Analysis Centers (IACs) in the United States and one of ten IACs under the Defense Technical Information Center (DTIC), the CBRNIAC provides CBRN Defense and Homeland Security (HLS) science and tech-nology information to the DoD, the military services, warf-ighters, federal, state and local government agencies and first responders and private sector government contractors in industry and academia. Through its Inquiry and Referral Services, CBRNIAC Inquiry Analysts can search, identity, retrieve, analyze and synthesize CBRN Defense and HLS scientific and technical information from multiple sources. The collective expertise of our Inquiry Team covers sci-entific and engineering disciplines in all aspects of CBRN Defense and HLS. Our reach-back capability provides immediate access to subject matter experts (SMEs) in gov-ernment, industry and academia. For more than 20 years, CBRNIAC staff members have been a part of the CBRN Defense history, committed to finding the most complete and authoritative CBRN Defense and HLS information.

DATABASE ACCESSCBRNIAC Inquiry Analysts have access to more than 90 U.S. DoD and other Federal CBRN and HLS related elec-tronic information repositories. Examples of the databases and resources available to our analysts include:

• CBRN START – Chemical, Biological, Radiological and Nuclear Scientific and Technical Analysis Research Tool, CBRNIAC’s premier database, is an on-line, menu-driven database containing a completely digitized, unclassified collection of over 126,000 citations to docu-ments across all CBRN Defense and HLS subject areas. Of these citations, over 70,000 correspond to documents

at the CBRNIAC, while the rest are available through other collections, such as the DTIC, the U.S. Army Dugway Proving Ground Technical Information Center, and the Edgewood Chemical Biological Center (ECBC) Technical Library.

• TEMS – Total Electronic Migration System is a DTIC-sponsored database that allows qualified users access to search online text libraries from all DoD IACs.

• Public STINET – A DTIC-sponsored Scientific and Technical Information Network database accessing DoD scientific and technical information at the public release level.

• Private STINET – A DTIC-sponsored Scientific and Technical Information Network database accessing DoD scientific and technical information; contains limited dis-tribution data and is not publicly accessible.

• CDMD – Chemical Defense Materials Database contains data from technical reports on over 1,100 materials that have been exposed to Chemical Warfare agents, simu-lants and decontaminants.

• BACWORTH – Biological and Chemical Warfare Online Repository and Technical Holdings contains data on chemical and biological (CB) agents, toxins and riot con-trol agents (limited to U.S. Government Agencies only; Export Controlled).

• P2NBC2– The Physiological and Psychological Effects of Nuclear, Biological, and Chemical Environment and Sustained Operations on Systems in Combat database contains data collected from 1985-1993 on 20 field tests with soldiers performing 463 tasks in MOPP4.

• ASK – The CB Agent/Simulant Knowledge database developed by the U.S. Army Edgewood Chemical Biological Center (ECBC) is an information repository of physical and chemical properties, toxicological data, applications, and environmental fate and effects informa-tion along with a chemical agent/simulant comparison search based on properties of interest.

By Dr. James M. King, Deputy Director, CBRNIAC

www.jpeocbd.osd.mil

JPEO-CBD

�

our web site at http://www.cbrniac.apgea.army.mil/info/inquiry.php. The CBRNIAC is dedicated to providing outstanding products and services to the CBRN Defense and Homeland Security communities. For further information about the CBRNIAC products and services, see an earlier article on the CBRNIAC in the Chem-Bio Defense Quarterly maga-zine, volume 4, number 3, or visit the CBRNIAC Web site at http://www.CBRNIAC.apgea.army.mil.

TYPES of INQUIRIES• Technical Inquiries: A review and analysis of technical

information obtained through standard search efforts. Technical information resources are analyzed, subject area experts are consulted when appropriate, and a sum-mary of the results with references and search informa-tion are provided.

• Referral Inquiries: If the CBRNIAC does not have direct access to the requested information, we will provide a point of contact, address, and/or phone number and fax number of an alternative information source. The CBRNIAC maintains a database that contains listings of agencies, subject area experts, other IAC resources, and pertinent referral information.

• Bibliographic Inquiries: Clients requesting literature searches and summaries receive a list of bibliographic citations to documents, including abstracts (if available), a summary of the search results and identification of the most relevant information. Comments and excerpts from pertinent documents may also be included.

• General Information Inquiries: Users needing informa-tion about the various products and services offered by the CBRNIAC may contact us for one of our free infor-mation packages.

SAMPLE INQUIRIESScenario: Anthrax-contaminated letters

Request: What types of Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) might be transportable through the U.S. mail or any common mail carrier?

Response: Requestors were provided annotated bibliogra-phies from searches performed on our CBRN START data-base, the BACWORTH encyclopedia and reliable scientific documentation on Internet sites.

Scenario: Potential Drinking Water Contamination

Request: What are the surety requirements for drinking water - level concentrations of chemical warfare agents?

Response: Subject Matter Experts (SMEs) were contacted to determine a reliable documentation of standards for drinking water. Inquiry Analysts were guided to Techni-cal Bulletin (TB) Med 577, the standard to follow at the time of the request. TB Med 577 is in the process of being updated by TB Med 577 Interim Guidance (July 2005).

SUBMIT an INQUIRY Questions in any area of our mission and scope can be posed by phone, email or by using the interactive form on

10


Jan - Mar �008

The mission of the biological stand-off program is to provide standoff detection, tracking, and discrimina-

tion of Biological Warfare Agent (BWA) clouds and allow Commanders theater-wide initial early warning capability against BWA attacks. The Joint Biologi-cal Standoff Detection System (JBSDS) provides the Warfighter this capability and future versions of the system will improve performance in several areas that are critical to mission success. The Increment 2 JBSDS objective is to advance the overall mission by improving the false alarm rate and detec-tion/discrimina-tion sensitivity while reducing the size, weight and power. This system will also be the first bio-logical standoff system to incor-porate the United State Navy and United States Marine Corps as users. The Increment 2 Joint Biological Standoff Detec-tion System (JBSDS) program was initiated in 2004 at Aberdeen Proving Grounds, Edgewood Area, Md under management of the Joint Program Manager for Nuclear, Biologi-cal and Chemical Contamination Avoid-ance (JPM-NBC-CA). In April 2005 the JBSDS program was transitioned to the command of Col Daniel K Berry in the newly formed Joint Program Manager for Biological Defense (JPM-BD). The past 36 months has provided a promising outlook for the future of

biological standoff development with the hard work of numerous participants from industry, academic and foreign sources. In addition, JBSDS team members partici-pate bi-annually in the Biological Standoff Working Group (BSWG) with the United Kingdom (UK) and Canada. The Memo-randum of Understanding (MOU) for this working group includes the distribution of collected test data, updates on current Light Detection and Ranging (LIDAR)

development programs and invitations for participation at their respective biological standoff tests. Starting in early 2004, The Johns Hop-kins University Applied Physics Labora-tory (JHU/APL) drafted two technology comparison white papers that looked at 14 possible biostandoff sensing candi-dates for the Increment 2 JBSDS program based on current system developers or sponsors. These reports also identi-fied specific technologies and mapped

projected performance against a set of the most current Increment 2 JBSDS require-ments available. The overall results concluded that LIDAR still offers the best performance projection and that a hybrid technology approach with LIDAR was most favorable for an Increment 2 JBSDS system. Using the results from the technology com-parison white papers it was decided that a technology demonstration was ultimately

necessary to properly evalu-ate the promis-ing technologies described in the JHU/APL reports. In parallel with the technology white papers the JBSDS Increment 2 program created a Requirements Assessment group that consisted of members from the Edgewood Chemical and Biological Center (ECBC), Decision Analysis Team (DAT), The Joint Require-ments Office

(JRO), Service Combat Developers from the Army, Navy, Air Force and Marines, JPM-BD Staff and ECBC Research and Technology representatives. The require-ments assessment study aimed to assess the likelihood that prospective technolo-gies will meet proposed JBSDS Increment 2 requirements, discussion of possible platforms that the system will be used on, scenario development for future biologi-cal standoff applications and providing this feedback to the JRO on achievable

By Michael Mays, JPM-BD, JBSDS Team

The Edgewood Chemical Biological Center Log Wave Infrared Frequency Lidar System.

www.jpeocbd.osd.mil

JPEO-CBD

11

threshold requirements based on current and near-term technologies. Meetings have been held biannually providing the members with program updates and the data analysis results from technology demonstrations. Ultimately, the JRO will be able to use the information supplied from this study to develop the JBSDS Increment 2 Capability Development Document (CDD). Using the information detailed in the early technology assessment reports, an initial technology demonstration was scheduled to evaluate promising tech-nologies with simulants and monitor the development progress of promising systems. The technology demonstra-tions at Dugway Proving Grounds (DPG) started in third quarter fiscal year (FY) 2005 and will continue annually through early FY09. These technology assess-ments have included tests at the Standoff Ambient Breeze Tunnel (SABT), Joint Ambient Breeze Tunnel (JABT) and vari-ous test ranges around Dugway Proving Grounds. Systems have also been tested in Philadelphia, Pa and the Philadelphia Naval Business Center (PNBC). The first technology demonstration, in the summer of 2005, ran for three weeks, demonstrated 12 different systems that covered 5 different technologies and comprised of more than 175 releases of biological simulants and/or interferents. Technologies demonstrated at this test included Laser Induced Fluorescence (LIF), Passive IR Spectroscopy, Elastic Scatter Depolarization, Hyperspectral Imaging, Differential Elastic Backscat-tering and also included systems from Canada and the UK. The test report determined that a follow-on test should be conducted to assess the development progress for a select number of systems and that a formal evaluation of technologies performance in urban envi-ronments be completed. Technology Demonstration 2 began in mid-2006 and systems were tested again at the JABT and various test sites around Dugway Proving Grounds along with a background collection effort at the PNBC in Philadelphia. As a result of the Technology Demon-stration 2 analysis, the Joint Science & Technology Office (JSTO) funded a three technology maturation effort to provide a Technology Readiness Level (TRL) 6 technology by the end of FY09 while the JPM-BD continued developmental work on

laser induced fluorescence (LIF) and several modeling and simulation developments. The JSTO is in year two of a three-year development effort through FY09 that is looking at multi-wavelength depolariza-tion and Long Wave Infrared (LWIR) frequency agile LIDAR technologies. This technology maturation project was expanded to include the development of a comprehensive biological signature database that is planned for use in future algorithm development and biological standoff system evaluations. The collec-tive efforts of this S&T project include participants from ECBC, JHU/APL, Mas-sachusetts Institute of Technology Lincoln

Laboratories (MIT-LL) and Lockheed Martin Coherent Technologies. Based on the results from the two Tech-nology Demonstrations, a further inves-tigation into fluorescence signature and discrimination algorithm developments was initiated by JHU/APL. The main focus of this study is to look at improv-ing the JBSDS Increment 1 algorithm by exploiting unique biological signature features and improving the current detec-tion and discrimination process. Data sets used for this analysis included the JBSDS Increment 1 Korea Background study, JBSDS Product Verification Test 3 (PVT-3) and the FY06/07 Multi-Service

System alignment at the JABT during a JBSDS Increment II technology demonstration.

1�


Jan - Mar �008

Operation Tests (MOT&E). The Modeling, Simulation and Analysis (MSA) Team, Research, Development and Engineering Command is currently incorporating the JBSDS into the Chemi-cal Biological Simulation Suite (CB Sim Suite) in conjunction with the One Semi-Automated Force Testbed Baseline to assess standoff sensors in a set of operat-ing cases. Initially, this model will incor-porate the JBSDS Increment 1 system but will ultimately be designed so that integra-tion of the JBSDS Increment 2 system will be possible. The development of this model will be a great source for demon-strating scenarios in which the JBSDS system could ultimately be employed. MIT/LL is also in the process of modeling a variety of standoff sensor fusion concepts that include LIDAR-LIDAR, LIDAR-point sensor, LIDAR-UAV, LIDAR-Contextual Information, LIDAR-Disparate Battlefield Sensors and Low Cost LIDAR networking. The ultimate goal is to understand how an applied sensor fusion algorithm will create a synergism that provides the warfighter with a more comprehensive and accurate picture of the battle space. In addition to the fusion algorithm study, MIT is also aiding the MSA Team in development of scenarios for inclu-sion in the CB Sim Suite. It is the vision of the biostandoff team to provide our warfighter a system that pro-vides significant operational advantages against biological attacks. The continu-ation of the Increment 2 JBSDS program provides the warfighter advanced warning to get into protective posture before expo-sure and enhances the available informa-tion for a complete battlefield assessment. Current assessments of technologies tell us that we can meet the pressing warf-ighter need for advanced warning and cloud tracking of biological threats. These technology developments would not be possible without the continued participa-tion and support of all those involved throughout the past 36 months. Along with our industrial and academic partners, the JBSDS team looks forward to meeting the challenge of biological standoff detec-tion for the future.

www.jpeocbd.osd.mil

JPEO-CBD

1�

Visit Morgan State University between 11 am and 1 pm on a weekday and you will usually see students enjoying their lunch or cramming in some

last minute study time before they head to their next class. But on a Thursday in late November 2007, approximately 100 students crowded into the auditorium of the college’s engineering building during their lunch period, eager to hear about professional and career development opportunities. They came to listen to a panel of speakers discuss the benefits of being a federal employee and encourage college students to pursue careers with the federal government. Some of the benefits of serving as a federal employee include the opportunity to work on high-profile projects and to travel around the globe according to Maj. Gen. Ronald Johnson, deputy commander for the U.S. Army Corps of

Engineers during the Nov. 29 visit to the school. “The jobs with the federal government are challenging and rewarding,” said Lt. Col. Alfred Abramson, joint project manager for Biological Defense and joint product Manager for Biological Detection Systems. Some of the speakers talked to

the students about the personal obstacles they faced in life and challenged the students to rise above adversity in order to succeed. “It’s not where you come from that matters; it’s where you are going,” said Johnson. Abramson and Johnson were not the only federal employees who spoke to Morgan’s students about federal job opportunities. They were joined by a panel of representatives

from the federal government including: Alvin D. Thornton, deputy director of the Engineering Directorate for the Edgewood Chemical Biological Center; Delray N. Wylie, joint project manager for Biological Defense and project manager/electrical engineer for the Joint Biological Standoff Detection System; and Floyd E. Taliaferro, IV, system engineer for the Edgewood Chemical Biological Center.

Not only did the panel of speakers talk to students, they also had an opportunity to tour the Morgan campus, observing the classrooms and labs in Morgan State’s Clarence M. Mitchell, Jr. School of Engineering. Situated in Baltimore City, Morgan State University is a historically black college that produces more African-American scientists and engineers than any other college or university in the state of Maryland. Johnson said the upcoming workload for the Corps demands a need to recruit these students. “We need more engineers to handle our increasing workload,” said Johnson. Wylie, a former U.S. Army Corps of Engineers’ employee and Morgan State alumnus organized the November event for Morgan’s engineering students. He said that each member of the panel was influential in helping him in his career and he organized this event because he wanted the opportunity to give back. “I love my alma mater, and would like every student to have an opportunity to be successful in their occupational endeavors,” said Wylie. “There are great opportunities for military and civilians in the federal government.”

Morgan State hoStS SpeakerS froM federal governMent

By Chanel S. Weaver, Army Corps of Engineers Public Affairs Office

Morgan State

“It’s not where you come from that matters; it’s where you are going.”

Lt. Col. Alfred Abramson III, Joint Product Manager, Biological Detec-tion Systems, told Morgan State Students working for the govern-ment is “challenging and reward-ing.”

Maj. Gen. Ronald Johnson, deputy com-mander, US Army Corps of Engineers, spoke to chemical and engineering stu-dents at Morgan State University about opportunities in the government.

Pho

tos

by C

hane

l Wea

ver

African-American History Month

1� Jan - Mar �008


Tracey D. Biggs is a biologist with U.S. Army Research Development Engineering Command,

Edgewood Chemical Biological Center, Research and Technology Directorate, Biodefense Team at Aberdeen Proving Ground. The Baltimore native has been a biologist for 20 years and at Aberdeen for 16 years. Biggs has earned bachelors degrees in biology (University of Maryland, Eastern Shore) and nursing (Villa Julie College). She answered questions about her job, her influences and life as a scientist.

When did you realize this is what you wanted to do for a career?

I was in high school when I realized that I had an interest in the natural sciences and health sciences. A childhood experience influenced me to major in radiology. While I was a freshman, I switched my major to biology. I knew very early on that I did not want to be a school teacher or a physician. At the time, I thought a researcher working in a laboratory environment was in my future.

Who were your primary influences to pursue this field?

My parents primarily influenced me to pursue a career in biology. They would have supported me in any field I chose to pursue. My mother majored in environmental science and is a retired science teacher and my father minored in science. When I was growing up, most of the books on the shelves in my house were science books. While I was attending middle school, I would occasionally go with my mother to her evening college science courses.

Is this career path what you expected it to be? What aspects of the career have surprised you, now that you’re into it?

This career path is somewhat what I expected. I like the fact that I’ve been exposed to many different areas of science throughout my career, be it in the chemical or biological arenas. I’ve worked in histology, immunology, microbiology, analytical chemistry,

Have you found that as a scientist, you’re only compared to other African-American and female scientists? As an African-American woman, who are your role models within the field (or outside it) and why? Do you have male role models or role models of other ethnicities?

No, I have not found that people have only compared me to other African-American scientists. For one thing, there are very few well-known African-American scientists and very few in my current working environment. My parents are role models of course, for raising me with love, care, guidance, and morals that have helped mold me into the person that I am today. I really don’t have role models within my field. There are people in and outside of my field that I’ve met or have learned about and have admired for their guidance on how to survive in the workforce or in life in general and for their achievements that are not widely known. Some of the unsung and not so well-known scientists I have come to admire are Mr. Vivien Thomas (surgery technician/teacher), Dorothy V. McClendon (military microbiologist), Dr. Shirley Ann Jackson (physicist), Dr. Lloyd A. Hall

Compiled by Stephen Gude, Assistant Editor, Chem-Bio Defense Quarterly

www.jpeocbd.osd.mil

JPEO-CBD

1�

(chemist and inventor), Dr. Meredith C. Gourdine (physicist and engineer), Dr. Ernest E. Just (zoologist, biologist, physiologist and research scientist), Dr. Jewell Cobb (cell biologist and physiologist), Dr. Mary Styles Harris (geneticist), Dr. Ruth E. Moore (bacteriologist), Dr. Ida Owens (biochemist), Mr. Emmett W. Chappelle (biochemist), and Dr. Dale Emeagwali (microbiologist).

In the same vein, do you feel as an African-American woman that you have a responsibility to demonstrate to young ladies they too can do what you’ve done? How do you get your message across to them? Was there ever a person in your life who delivered that message to you?

Young African-American woman can do what I have done and a great deal more. I get my message across to them by imparting my knowledge and sharing my good and bad experiences when asked to speak to high school kids, through mentoring high school girls, or by just taking the time to speak with young ladies after judging their science fair projects.

Describe Tracey Biggs. What is she like as a person?

I am a low-key person, very reserved, professional and

serious about my work. It takes a lot of concentration and focus to do what I do. I am dependable and reliable – my lab partners and I depend on each other, especially for safety in the labs. I am a person of integrity; integrity is important when collecting and reporting data. I project a positive image in all I do.My experiences at ECBC have affected the person I am professionally. I do not feel I have found my niche or that I am an expert in any one area, but I am good at what I do. I have other interests I would like to pursue one day. It would take a leap of faith, motivation and determination for me to pursue them. Work is not my entire life – I love to travel and have fun with my family and friends. I have been to many places and I am always thinking about where I can go next or what I can do over the weekend that is different and fun.

What will Tracey Biggs be doing in 15 years? What are your goals?

In 15 years, I plan to be retired from civil service. However, my goals are to continue to work in the community health field as a registered nurse. I like to travel, so maybe I will combine my second career with traveling.

Tracy Biggs, a biologist at U.S. Army Research, Development and Engineering Command, Edgewood Chemical and Biological Center, Md., counts her parents as influences for her interest in science.


1� Jan - Mar �008


When Vikki D. Henderson was close to her high school gradu-ation, she was faced with the

same decision that faces many graduates – what to do after she was finished with her primary education. Her father, an Army first sergeant, was pushing college, but Henderson said she had no idea what she wanted to do. By her way of thinking, she made a lucky choice. “I decided to join the military to buy some time,” said the 48-year-old, a physi-cal science technician with the Decon-tamination Sciences Team, Research and Technology Directorate, U.S. Army Research, Development and Engineering Command at Edgewood Chemical and Biological Center. “I told my dad I didn’t want to waste his money and my time attending college without a goal in mind.” Henderson’s score on the Armed Forces Vocational Battery (a test used to help determine a recruit’s military occupational specialty (MOS)), was high enough that she could choose her career field. She was not inclined to choose the route her recruiter selected for her – administration. ”My recruiter tried to steer me into personnel; ‘typical field for a woman,’ I thought and something I wasn’t interesting in doing. I wanted something I felt would be challenging to me. I noticed there were two chemical specialties, and one offered a huge bonus. The other mentioned work-ing in a lab, and since I was the indoor type, I chose the lab, the one without a bonus. I’ve always been inquisitive and thought the field of chemistry would be interesting. It was nothing but a lucky choice.” As luck would have it, Henderson, who was born in Miami and raised in Virginia, California, New Jersey and Germany, met the man who would become her husband – Amos Henderson – during Advanced Individual Training. Ironically, Amos

signed up for the MOS with the bonus, thinking he would be working in a lab. “Much to his surprise, it was not in the lab, but he’s the outdoors type and loved his job as a chemical operations special-ist,” Henderson said. Today, Henderson serves as the techni-cal lead for the reactor team in the conduct of research studies, supporting mission programs. However, her start in the chemical field was not what she expected. Although she appreciated what she did – “I was impressed with the work the organization accomplished and that what we did directly supported the soldier. I could participate in the creation and test-ing of some of the items that would even-tually be fielded,” she said – she found the adjustment difficult. “In the beginning, I was overwhelmed and felt as though I was out of my league. It was challenging and sometimes intimidating to be surrounded by so many talented and intelligent people. Many soldiers and noncommissioned officers in my unit had undergraduate and graduate degrees. Military and civilian co-workers were valedictorians, former high school and college teachers and professors and experts in their fields,” she said. Henderson, the oldest of eight siblings, knew she was smart and despite the chal-lenge, she remained a confident young woman. Her husband encouraged her to attend college and she said the mentorship of certain people was key to her blossom-ing within the job. “I was fortunate to work with people who were willing to mentor me,” she said. “There were many along the way, and the principal investigators I worked with were Ted Novak, a chemist, taught me to be meticulous in my work. Robert Armstrong, a toxicologist, pushed me to try new things. Foy Ferguson and Joseph Hovanec, both analytical chemists, treated

me as an equal and also encouraged me to pursue a degree in chemistry. They allowed me to grow and take on more responsibilities.” The motivation of her husband and others, along with Henderson’s own desire to excel, gave her the push to enroll in college and pursue a degree in chemis-try. Advice from her sister-in-law, Linda Thomas, helped as well. “I complained to her years ago about how much time school required and how tired I was and whether it was really worth it,” Henderson said. “She said ‘Vikki, time is going to pass whether you go to school or not; you might as well do some-thing constructive with that time.’ All those nights I spent doing calculus, phys-ics and organic chemistry, I would think of her. Eventually, I earned an associates degree and I really have to thank Linda for motivating me to keep going. She’s still in college and hasn’t given up on her goal. To this day, I advise my grown children (a 28-year-old son and 25-year-old daugh-ter) about priorities, commitments and constructive use of time.” Now 29 years into her career – seven in the military and 22 as a civilian – Hender-son is a role model, not only to her chil-dren, but to anyone she comes into contact with. She leads by example, and lets her love for her job serve that purpose. “I love being a technician. I am happy as a technician and want to be the best. This role also allows me time to pursue other opportunities, such as serving on commit-tees within the organization and an active participant in the labor union. I listen to (young African-American women) and give them advice. I try to encourage and help them pursue their goals. It all boils down to what you make of it, I tell them. That’s a message my mother delivered to me.” While her family describes her as a

By Stephen Gude, Assistant Editor, Chem-Bio Defense Quarterly

www.jpeocbd.osd.mil

JPEO-CBD

1�

perfectionist and her co-workers say she is very organized, she sees herself as a giver who is down-to-earth, friendly and loves helping people and the organization. Her favorite time of the year is Christmas, when she helps with the organization’s toy and food drives. Henderson also loves professional tennis and college basketball. One thing many people don’t know about her is when she was 15, she actually spent the summer reading encyclopedias. “I told my son that story and he called me a serious nerd,” she said. “My friends thought that I had gone out of town for the summer. I guess at times I have serious nerd tendencies. “It’s the same way with college bas-ketball and pro tennis,” she continued. “During the month of March and major tennis tournaments, I won’t answer the phone or talk to anyone.” When it comes down to what she is

going to do for herself and her future, Henderson has a plan. “I’m going to continue learning, remain current in the field and look for new tasks and opportunities over the next 10 to 12 years. Long-term, I hope to be retired, living in Alabama with my husband in our dream home, volunteering my time help-ing others in some way. Maybe I will go back to college and start a second career.” Before she starts talking about that potential second career, she feels she has plenty to accomplish in her first, which includes showing women and minori-ties that there are opportunities for them in chemistry. Henderson is part of an Employee Advisory Committee. “Our goal is to identify barriers that inhibit the hiring and advancement of minorities,” she said. “Unfortunately, there aren’t many African-Americans in scientific fields, not to mention African-American women. As a physical science

technician, I was content to stay in the background, to be the right hand woman, like a surgeon’s head nurse. But Dr. Mark Brickhouse called on me to step outside of my comfort zone. I’m glad I did. “For most of my career, I was usually the only technician and woman, other than administrative support, within the team,” Henderson continued. “That has changed in the last five years. There are more female chemists and technicians on my team. Still, there are too few African-American scientists and technicians.” Henderson said she admires the women who hold their own in the male-dominated field, and she also counts several African-American men as role models, such as Ferguson, William Starke, Eugene Vickers and Dr. Michael Ellzy. “I feel their achievements have or are paving the way for others,” she said. For-tunately – luckily – for the next genera-tion, so are hers.

Vikki Henderson, a physical science technician with the Decontamination Sciences Team, U.S. Army Research, Development and Engi-neering Command, Edgewood Chemical and Biological Center, attributes her success to the mentorship of key people in her life.

Pho

to p

rovi

ded

by V

ikki

Hen

ders

on


18 Jan - Mar �008


I t’s an old story --- items and methods created by or for the military are read-ily adopted by the civilian sector.

Two scientists at U.S. Army Dugway Proving Ground (DPG) may someday be credited with creating a process to inves-tigate how to quickly decontaminate areas made uninhabitable by the illegal drug methamphetamine. Since its inception in 1942, the focus of DPG has been testing defenses against chemical and biological warfare agents, including how to decontaminate materiel and Soldiers after they’ve been contami-nated. In these tests a simulant is used. A simu-lant is a benign substance with charac-

teristics nearly identical to a chemical or biological agent. By far, more simulants are used in testing than actual agents because of their greater safety, ease of handling, low toxicity and eco-friendliness, which means fewer state and federal restrictions. Nonetheless, many simulants must be decontaminated after the test, using meth-ods that may only be a step from chemical simulant to decontaminate methamphet-amine, Brad Rowland and Wes Ercanbrack believe. Rowland, a government employee, is chief project scientist at the Combined Chemical Test Facility (CCTF), operated by West Desert Test Center (WDTC) at DPG. Ercanbrack, working with him, is the

deputy chemical division manager at CCTF and a Jacobs Sverdrup/ Team Dugway contractor. West Desert Test Center and DPG are under the Developmental Test Command (DTC) on Aberdeen Proving Ground, Md.. In turn, DTC is under the Army Test and Evaluation Command (ATEC) headquar-tered in Alexandria, Va. For Rowland, the need for an effective, standardized method of decontaminating the toxins left by the use or production of methamphetamine became personal.Last year, rental units he owns in Salt Lake City were contaminated with methamphet-amine. Suddenly, as a landlord, he was faced with a decontamination requirement

Chemical Simulant Decon Study:Path to Inexpensive Meth Decon?By Al Vogel, Public Affairs, Dugway Proving Ground

Pho

to b

y A

l Vog

el

Wes Ercanbrack (left) and Brad Rowland (right) of West Desert Test Center at U.S. Army Dugway Proving Ground, Utah. The two scientists created a system for decontaminating a large test chamber that may be useful in the civilian sector for decontaminating areas made toxic by the illegal drug methamphetamine.

www.jpeocbd.osd.mil

JPEO-CBD

1�

costing thousands of dollars. “And they (the tenants) weren’t even making it, they were just using it,” Row-land said. “That’s the problem with current remediation laws – contamination from use is treated like the toxic process of manufac-turing, requiring decontamination down to low levels.” The ins and outs of decontamination were nothing new to Rowland, who has worked in the chemical defense field for years – but decontaminating illegal drug toxins was a new aspect. Decontaminating toxins left by using or manufacturing methamphetamine has become an expensive national problem. In 2006, according to the Drug Enforcement Administration, 6,435 methamphetamine labs were busted nationwide. In Utah, 11 labs were busted. Missouri led the nation with 1,268. And that’s only labs; build-ings contaminated solely by drug use are not listed. Decontamina-tion experts in Salt Lake City Valley estimate that 20 to 30 percent of all apartment units are contaminated from methamphetamine use, Rowland noted, adding that contamination from its use is much less toxic than that produced by manufacturing. Rowland had to hire a licensed, private contractor to decontaminate his apartment building. “A 700-square-foot apartment, with no ventilation ducts, will cost at least $3,500 to be deconned by someone who knows what they’re doing. And that’s not includ-ing repairs. If the room has vents or ducts, you’re looking at $15,000 minimum for decontamination and repairs. Deconning ducts and vents is really labor intensive,” he said. The similarity between decontaminating methamphetamine and decontaminating a chemical simulant is very close. Last year, Rowland and Ercanbrack were tasked to create a cheaper and easier method to decontaminate a house-sized chamber on DPG, in which a simulant for chemical agent had been used to challenge reconnaissance vehicles. Post-test cleanup required that the simu-lant be thoroughly removed, so it would not later make air monitoring systems give

false positives. The size of the chamber was not the only problem. The simulant used was particu-larly difficult to decontaminate. Ironically, Rowland explained, it often takes more effort to remove simulants because they are not as chemically reactive as the agents they replicate. “We knew it would cost a lot of money, so we wanted to investigate the best way to decontaminate that chamber, using small-scale lab processes to identify what could give us the best efficiency on a large scale,” Ercanback said. “Traditionally, we have tested numerous types of decontamination methods but for large area decon, aerosolization is key.” Ercanbrack said. “We’ve reduced the effort needed to get into cracks and crevices,” Rowland said. The efficiency was due to fogging

--- aerosolizing the decontaminant and allowing it to settle onto all surfaces. Traditionally, decontamination means hand-scrubbing with a liquid; a method that is laborious and can miss areas. Aerosoliza-tion means no surface is left untouched.Particularly interesting was vaporous hydrogen peroxide in a high concentra-tion. The kind used to bleach hair or to dress wounds is 0.1 to 5 percent, but this was 35 percent. Once aerosolized, the high concentration hydrogen peroxide was able to decontaminate large areas at once.Ercanbrack said its application can be as simple as, “dialing in the concentration, and the length of time you want to hold it at that concentration. At the end of that time it will automatically decompose into water.” The transformation isn’t alchemy – hydrogen peroxide (H202) is the chemi-cal cousin of water (H20). Some of the methodologies developed by Rowland and Ercanbrack have improved simulant decontamination by a factor of 10 – an older process costing $1,000 and 100 man-hours might now only cost $100 and require 10 man-hours.

Work at the CCTF has always tested the effectiveness of decontaminants on surfaces typically contaminated by chemical warfare agents: stainless steel, painted metal, concrete, flexible conduit, insulation around electrical cables, etc. “Most other labs put the contaminant into a beaker of decontaminant and measure how long it takes to decompose,” Ercan-brack said. “We take it a step further by putting the contaminant on a sample of a real-world surface and then using different decontaminants.” Their epiphany came as they worked to develop the methodology, and discussed Rowland’s personal experiences with meth-amphetamine decontamination.Both men think that the same methodology should be used to establish effective proce-dures to decontaminate methamphetamine from these surfaces, and others typically

found in buildings: wood, sheetrock, floor tile, etc. “The past meth-ods used to decon-taminate simulants are similar, if not identical to, methods suggested by the City of Salt Lake for the remediation of chemical contami-nation, particularly

methamphetamines,” Rowland said. “Both require a lot of labor.” The decontaminants used in the recent simulant decontamination study are com-mercially available. However, their study determined which decontaminant to use and, equally or more important, how to apply it. Application can make or break the effectiveness of a decontaminant. In some instances, one decontaminant could be used, followed by another type.Neither of the scientists has approached the State of Utah about their findings. However, Rowland thinks Utah should have an organization responsible for decon-tamination that would advise businesses, the public and other agencies. Its mission would include funding applied decontami-nation and operational testing to counter a variety of public health threats, as well as to investigate methods used elsewhere. “The process of using chemical agent simulant decon for methamphetamine is feasible,” Ercanback said. “We’re interested in making people in the state aware of our approach and results.”

“Traditionally, we have tested numerous types of decontamination

methods but for large area decon, aerosolization is key.”

�0 Jan - Mar �008


The Common CBRN Sensor Interface (CCSI) stan-dard represents a step forward in the realization of MG Reeves’ concept of modular sensing capa-bilities that implement standardized interfaces.

CCSI is the JPEO-CBD standard for sensor physical and electronic interfaces, including component interconnects, power, external connectors, eXtensible Markup Language (XML) communications, a standard basic command set, and modularity. It will support net-centric communica-tions for all JPEO-CBD sensors and enable host platforms to identify and communicate with any CCSI sensor using common commands and reports.

CCSI is one piece within a suite of Common Components, illustrated below. These components will provide a stan-dardized interface for all CBRN sensors, from the physical interface through sensor security and discovery. The Net-Centric Security and Discovery Service (NSDS) provides:

• Authentication services to ensure that sensors and applica-tions are authorized to communicate

• Registry services to enable applications to find sensors that will support their operational requirements.

The Common CBRN Interface

BECOMES A REALITYBy Claude Speed and Tom Swanson, JPEO-CBD Software Support Activity (SSA) Architecture team

www.jpeocbd.osd.mil

JPEO-CBD

�1

The Common Modular Communications Interface Standard defines:

• Standard Ethernet communications• Standard wireless communications.The CCSI Standard provides:• Common sensor interface performance requirements• Required and recommended standards• Recommendations for sensor architecture and implementa-

tion• An evolving standard as technology changes, lessons are

learned, etc.

CCSI is one of the first of the JPEO-CBD Common Com-ponents. It is a standard -- not a program . It will be ret-rofit into existing programs where it makes sense to satisfy warfighter requirements. CCSI does not specify sensing capability, power consumption of sensors, or size and weight for all sensors. It also does not specify host system data pro-cessing since that is controlled by Service and joint doctrine, approved requirements, and program-specific needs.

CCSI Development was initiated after the Joint CBRN Dismounted Reconnaissance System (JCDRS) Phase III Lim-ited Objective Experiment (LOE), generally known as the Holster Concept. Holster continues as experimentation on miniaturization, new environments, new sensors, and com-munications methods. CCSI was spun out to be the first set of common sensor specifications for JPEO-CBD.CCSI was a collaborative effort among JPEO-CBD and out-side interested parties, including:

• JPEO-CBD Software Support Activity (SSA)• JPEO-CBD Future Acquisitions (FA)• JPEO-CBD Joint Project Manager for Biological Defense

(JPM BD)• JPEO-CBD Joint Project Manager for Nuclear, Biological

and Chemical Contamination Avoidance (JPM NBC CA)• JPEO-CBD Joint Project Manager for Information Systems

(JPM IS)• Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA) Joint Science

and Technology Office (JSTO)• Joint Requirements Office (JRO)• Penn State University• Northrop Grumman Information Technology JCID devel-

opers• Industry at appropriate points in the review and comment

period on the draft standard.

Initial Development of the CCSI began with a character-ization of CBRN Sensors to identify common attributes that were candidates for standardization, such as:

• Sensor Installation (Fixed, mobile, dismounted, etc.)• Sensor Power (Commercial, platform, internal, etc.)• Sensor Communications (Wired, wireless, none, bandwidth

needs, etc.)• Sensor Operation (Interactive, automatic, mixed)• Sensor Environments (Combat, severe, outdoor, indoor)• Sensor Security (High, medium, low for physical, commu-

nications, electronic)

This information was used to develop DoD Architecture Framework (DoDAF) architecture products such as the Operational Activity Model (OV-5), the Operational Informa-tion Exchange Matrix (OV-3), the logical data model (OV-7) and the XML schema (SV-11). The SSA Architecture Team determined that network security and discovery mechanisms would be scoped to another architecture (NSDS) to enable the CCSI to operate interchangeably in environments such as the System of Systems Common operational Environ-ment (SOSCOE) of the Future Combat Systems (FCS), the Defense Information Systems Agency’s (DISA) Net-Centric Enterprise Services (NCES), and Naval Engineering Control Systems (ECS).

The CCSI Standard includes:

• CCSI Volume I – Summary and Architecture• CCSI Volume II – Physical Interface Standards• CCSI Volume III – Electronic Interface Standards

CCSI Implementation is well underway. The CCSI Stan-dard was completed in November 2007 and provides the information needed for:

• Vendors to embed all required CCSI capabilities into their sensors during its development

• A third party to develop components for use by many vendors, e.g. Joint Tactical Radio System (JTRS) radio and Global Positioning System (GPS) receiver components, dismounted power components

• Software for CCSI as a package for vendors to use

As part of implementation, components and sensors will be tested to ensure that they are CCSI-compliant and registered. CCSI Test Tools will be provided to vendors from a public repository to validate the Sensor Definition XML and sensor communications.

This Standard is referenced by the JPEO-CBD Net-Cen-tric Implementation Policy and will be included in all future JPEO-CBD program procurements to ensure that the JPEO-CBD net-centric vision is fully realized.

��


Jan - Mar �008

Anew chemical agent test facility is underway at the Edgewood Chemical Biological Center, Aberdeen Proving Ground, Maryland. This new facility, when completed, will provide the Chemical and

Biological Defense Community a significant step forward in the ability to conduct testing with chemical agents and other toxic chemicals in a variety of environmental conditions. The testing capability provided will focus on contamination avoid-ance (detection systems), decontamination (decontaminants), individual protection (masks, suits, boots, and gloves), and collective protection (filtration systems) material development. The facility will also be capable of supporting research and experimentation to assess chemical composition and material degradation effects of chemical agents and other toxic materi-als on military equipment. The Product Director, Test Equipment, Strategy and Sup-

port (PD TESS), part of the Joint Project Manager for Nuclear, Biological and Chemical Contamination Avoidance (JPM NBC CA), is responsible for the design and fabrication of this new capability. The new capability will reside in a pre-engineered building recently constructed in the Edgewood Area of Aber-deen Proving Ground. To develop the design of the facility, PD TESS, working closely with technical and scientific staff from ECBC, awarded a design and fabrication task contract through the U.S. Army Communications-Electronics Command Rapid Response contract vehicle in July 2006. The contract included system technical performance requirements derived from commodity area “roadmap requirements” developed during extensive con-sultation with project managers and other materiel developers, researchers, testers, and independent evaluators. The design task included an initial assessment of requirements feasibil-

By Steven Harlacker, Sense Laboratory (Chemical) Team Lead, Joint Project Manager, NBC Contamination Avoidance, Product Director, Test Equipment, Strategy & Support

Building for new Edgewood Chemical Biological Center (ECBC) test facility.

www.jpeocbd.osd.mil

JPEO-CBD

��

the use of caustic decontami-nants as well as the broad range of test environmen-tal and chemical challenge conditions required. The test chambers also include glove port accessibility, and depending on the test, can provide double containment for the most hazardous chal-lenge environments. PD TESS also commis-sioned the facility design contractor to develop and fabricate a full-scale opera-tional mockup of the largest, most complex test chamber. Aside from providing an opportunity for the early assessment of component and subsystem design features, the mockup also allows ECBC operating and test per-sonnel to develop and prove-out operating procedures and

test protocols using innocuous simulants in a safe environ-ment that closely simulates the appearance and performance conditions of the actual test chamber. PD TESS expects the contractor to complete the build of the chamber mockup in early 2008. The new ECBC chemical test facility represents a major leap forward for the Chemical Biological Defense Community. Once completed, the facility will offer Milestone Decision

Authorities, Joint Project Managers, and the test and evalu-ation community a capability to experiment and test with toxic challenge materials under environmental conditions on a scale not previously possible. As a result, the Chemical and Biological Defense Program can look forward to improved experimentation, test data, and more meaningful technology assessments and system evaluations in the future.

ity by the design contractor, followed by three increas-ingly detailed design itera-tions to address the technical performance and operational needs of the facility. To date, the contractor has completed the first two design iterations and is nearing completion of the final design. Upon approval of the final design, PD TESS expects to execute a fabrication/installation task contract in 2008, with a goal of completing the facility in late 2009. Facility design includes operational workspace within the building for test sup-port functions, such as waste containment, decontaminant distribution, mechanical services (workshop), envi-ronmental conditioning, and air filtration. The design also includes several specialty test chambers where actual testing will take place. In addition, the facility includes an associated sample preparation and analytical support laboratory, a control room to remotely monitor and control test operations, requisite security and alarm systems, personnel showers, and airlocks to support operations with chemical surety materials and other toxic chemicals. The specially designed test chambers of the facility pro-

vides capabilities to conduct larger-scale tests, such as tests involving mannequins to evaluate personal protective equipment, and smaller-scale tests, such as tests of individual detector systems, swatches of protective material, and decon-taminants and decontamination kits. The test chambers’ design maintain containment of toxic chemical challenge environments through state-of-the-art engineering controls, and through fabrication methods and materials that permit

Design concept for test chamber within planned ECBC chemical test facility.

The new ECBC chemical test facility represents a major leap forward for

the Chemical Biological Defense Community.

��


Jan - Mar �008

TRE Article

Seven separate sys-tems designed to identify biological agents were recently challenged with

inactivated agents, simulants and interfering substances, against a time constraint. Sixteen vendors responded to have their biological detec-tors challenged. Ultimately, six commercial systems were selected. One military system, the Joint Biological Point Detection System (JBPDS), also participated. The results of the Technol-ogy Readiness Evaluation 2007 (TRE 07-1) are still being reviewed, but they may indicate tomorrow’s best technology to protect America and its allies against a biological incident or attack. The TRE 07-1 was spon-sored by Edgewood Chemical Biological Center (ECBC) of Aberdeen Proving Ground, Md. The National Assessment Group (NAG) of Kirtland Air

Force Base, N.M. provided test support for the biological detector challenge. It will analyze data and prepare a final report. The Life Sciences Division of

Dugway Proving Ground’s (DPG) West Desert Test Center provided the facili-ties, expertise, labs and samples for the challenge. Participants in the challenge were:Meso Scale Diagnostics of Gaith-ersburg, Md, ANP Technologies of Newark, Del, GHC Technologies of La Jolla, Calif, Constellation Technology

Corp. of Seminole, Fl, Luminex Corp. of Austin, Texas, and Smith’s Detection of Bushey, Hertfordshire, United Kingdom. Additionally, the Depart-ment of Defense’s JBPDS participated in the challenge as a baseline. Each vendor was provided with unknown samples of inactivated agent, various concentrations of simulated agent and typical interferents such as Vero cell supernatant, sandy soil, areo-sil® fluidizer, burning diesel fuel -- anything that might confuse the detector or affect its accuracy. Samples were prepared daily, including blank samples intended to reveal false posi-tives. None of the vendors knew what each sample held; they relied on what their system told them. They had a maximum of nine hours to analyze each day’s samples. Ultimately, each vendor’s system was challenged with approximately 365 samples,

Luminex Corporation of Austin, Texas, entered its system for identifying biological agents in the Technology Readi-ness Evaluation at U.S. Army Dugway Proving Ground, Utah.

Pho

to b

y A

l Vog

el

www.jpeocbd.osd.mil

JPEO-CBD

��

over a 10-day period. After the final day of testing, participants learned the results. The inactivated agents provided for the challenge were Bacillis atrophaeus (BG), a simulant for anthrax; Bacillis anthracis (Ames strain of anthrax), Bru-cella melitensis, which causes brucel-losis, Venezuelan equine encephalitis virus, Francisella tularensis, which causes tularemia, Vaccinia virus, of the family of poxes and Botulinum Toxin A, which causes botulism poisoning. For the vendors, it was a chance to test their system at a government test facility, obtain a quick, indepen-dent assessment of their technology’s maturity, get a summary report on their system’s performance and accuracy, and to learn if their system had any techni-cal voids. The U.S. government learned a great deal from TRE 07-1: who had the most technologically mature systems, what systems held the best promise for tomorrow’s biological detectors, whether each system might be used in the military’s JBPDS and the cost and support requirements to acquire and operate each system. “Technology Readiness Evaluations are excellent programs to allow the U.S. government to compare several state of the art biological systems in a con-trolled parallel test venue like Dugway Proving Ground,” said Daniel M. Nowak of ECBC. “Through TREs, the government can assess the systems for current and future biological detection developments.” Dugway Proving Ground was created in 1942 in the remote Utah desert, 80 miles from Salt Lake City. The primary mission of its West Desert Test Center is to test defenses against chemical

and biological warfare agents, making it an ideal facility for the TRE 07-1 challenge. Dugway Proving Ground is under the command of US Army Developmental Test Command, which in turn is under Army Test & Evalua-tion Command. “Having the TRE at Dugway was natural, since we test and evaluate bio-detectors all the time,” said Dr. Doug-las Winters, a microbiologist who was DPG’s test director for the biological detector challenge.Such systems may save countless lives in the future during a biological incident or attack, as resources are mustered to counter and quell it. Alternatively, a huge sigh of relief may be emitted, and resources con-served, as a suspected biological agent is positively identified as being some-thing innocuous.

Someday, reporting either result with certainty may be traceable back to two challenging weeks in the remote Utah desert. “Our Life Sciences personnel have a wide-range of expertise to draw from,” Dr. Winters said. “We work closely with Homeland Security, the military, FBI, Environmental Protection Agency and other government agencies. We have the only U.S. facility equipped to test with aerosolized Biosafety Level 3 agents. If someone needs expertise in biologi-cal defense, they often end up talking to Dugway.”

By Al Vogel, Public Affairs, Dugway Proving Ground

Ultimately, each vendor’s system was challenged with approximately �� samples over a 10-day period. Meso Scale Diagnostics of Gaithersburg, Md., entered the TRE Challenge with its PR� model 1�00 system for identifying biological agents.

Pho

to b

y A

l Vog

el

��


Jan - Mar �008

Magicians use the art of illusion to distract and deceive their audience; making the impossible appear possible. The Rapid

Obscuration Systems (ROS) Team at Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD are putting the illusory ‘smoke and mirrors’ to a very different use in the war on terrorism – saving lives. Part of the Joint Project Manager for Nuclear, Biological and Chemical Contamination Avoidance (JPM NBCCA), this diverse team of engineers and scientists develops smoke grenades and grenade launchers for the Army’s Family of Tactical Obscu-ration Devises (FOTOD) Program. Delivering enhanced capabilities to the Warfighter is the ROS Team’s number one priority. The first increment of the FOTOD program will deliver just that, and more, with a new hand-tossed smoke grenade, the XM106. Officially designated “Grenade, Hand; smoke, visual, restricted terrain, XM106,” this grenade will provide not only a new capability to the Warfighter; it will greatly expand the tactical use of smoke in urban warfare, counter-sniper, and close combat operations. What makes the XM106 smoke grenade a leap-ahead development in tactical obscurant devices are its Titanium Dioxide fill material and fiberboard body design. Titanium Dioxide, nicknamed ‘TiDi,’ is a non-combustible, non-burning, non-toxic powder with a variety of household and commercial applications. The XM106 explosively disperses the powdery TiDi fill to form a dense, white obscurant cloud that lasts for several seconds. The TiDi smoke obscures in the visual and near-infrared ranges of the electromagnetic spectrum. Because it is a non-toxic particulate smoke, and not a ‘burning’ smoke, the TiDi fill minimizes the smoke inhalation hazard

associated with current smoke materials. The XM106 is comparable in size and weight to the current AN-M8 HC grenade. The body of the XM106 grenade is constructed of a Mylar-coated fiberboard material with aluminum end-caps to securely hold the fuze in place when the grenade is ‘functioned’ (i.e., when the grenade is detonated). Long screws complete the ‘frame’ of the body by securing the end-caps together. The grenade is designed with safety in mind. When the grenade functions, the fiberboard body ruptures, dispersing the TiDi fill, while the ‘frame’ and fuze remain in tact. This design minimizes the fragmentation hazard associated with current smoke grenades. In addition, a second safety pull pin has been incorporated into the fuze design to reduce the risk of accidental functioning of the grenade. Together, the new TiDi fill material and fiber-board body design allow the XM106 grenade to be used in close proximity to friendly forces and in restricted terrain, including inside buildings, caves, and other enclosures. It gives Warfighters critical time that can drive the difference in survival during operations by making them virtually invisible to the enemy. The XM106 grenade design originated in 2003 with a requirement for a new smoke grenade to sup-port two Advanced Concept Technology Demonstra-tions (ACTDs) conducted by the Project Manager, Night Vision Cave and Urban Assault. To meet that requirement, an accelerated development effort for the Fast Obscurant Grenade (FOG) resulted in the now familiar fiberboard body design with the TiDi fill material. Based on its successful performance in the ACTDs, the Army’s Program Manager, Direct Sup-

Rapid Obscuration Systems;Not Just “Smoke and Mirrors”By Trish Weiss, Team Leader, Rapid Obscuration Systems

www.jpeocbd.osd.mil

JPEO-CBD

��www.jpeocbd.osd.mil ��

JPEO-CBD

port Asymmetric Warfare Group (PM DS AWG) requested a quantity of 2,000 FOGs for training and equipping of Warfighters deployed to Operation Iraqi Freedom. The FOGs were produced at Pine Bluff Arsenal, Arkansas. The U.S. Army Devel-opmental Command issued a safety release for the FOGs in June 2007 based on successful safety testing. Select units from the 10th Mountain Divi-sion were trained on use of the FOG last summer at Ft. Drum, New York and the remaining FOGs were deployed to theater in September. Warfighter feedback on the FOG has been very positive and new tactical uses for the grenade are being pro-posed. As a result, the PM DS AWG has requested additional quantities of the FOG. The FOG served as the basis of the XM106 grenade design. Other than its official designa-tion, the second safety pull pin on the fuze is the only distinguishing feature of the XM106 grenade from the original FOG design. Notably, any future production of FOGs will also require this second safety pin. The XM106 grenade will undergo its Product Qualification Testing (PQT), and Initial Operational Test and Evaluation (IOT&E) during 2008. Once the XM106 grenade successfully completes its test-ing program, a decision to proceed to full-rate pro-duction is expected in February 2009. Production would begin in March 2009 at Pine Bluff Arsenal and fielding would start in summer 2009. Because their designs are identical, the FOG will ultimately merge with the XM106 grenade, and no longer be produced. So, what’s next for the ROS Team? Working in collaboration with the Edgewood Chemical-Biological Center’s Research and Technology Directorate, the ROS Team is pursuing bi-spectral smoke fill materials that will provide obscuration in the visual and infrared spectral regions. Success-ful implementation of the bi-spectral material will transition as the next increment of grenades in the FOTOD Family. In addition, a future increment in the FOTOD Program will provide a new articulated grenade launcher and grenade to project smoke at

XM10�, Hand Grenade - smoke, visual, restricted terrain

greater distances. Collaborative efforts are under-way to develop this technology for both smoke and non-lethal grenade applications. Today’s Army acquisition environment is fast-paced and challenging, but the members of the ROS Team never lose sight of why their work is so important. Emerging smoke technologies and hardware offer new and critical capabilities to protect the Warfighter in the conduct of their mis-sions. These capabilities are not just ‘smoke and mirrors’. They can make a difference in bringing Warfighters home safely to their families.

Trish Weiss is Team Leader for Rapid Obscura-tion Systems, Joint Product Manager for Recon-naissance & Platform Integration, Joint Program Manager for Nuclear, Biological & Chemical Contamination Avoidance located at Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD.

�8


Jan - Mar �008

Individual protection equipment devel-opment programs are key to providing the Warfighter with chemical, biologi-

cal, and radiological protection on the bat-tlefield. To ensure Individual Protection Ensembles (IPE) work properly an effec-tive test program is needed. Up until now, the T&E community has provided this effective testing program, but improve-

ments are in the works. The Joint Program Manager Nuclear, Biological, and Chemi-cal Contamination Avoidance (JPM NBC CA) Product Director Test Equipment Strategy and Support (PD TESS), is devel-oping a new robotic capability, known as the IPE Mannequin System. The IPE

Mannequin System consists of an IPE Mannequin (or system of mannequins), a Chemical Warfare Agent (CWA) exposure chamber, data acquisition system, and a control room. The improved capabilities provided by this system when complete are; the capability to evaluate Individual Protection Ensembles (IPE) in a CWA environment, the ability to measure the

concentration of CWA under the IPE, and the ability to study the effect of various physical activity and environmental condi-tions on IPE performance. The new test capability will reside at Dugway Proving Ground, Utah, and is intended to support the development of improved chemical

protection equipment for the Warfighter. The integrated IPE Mannequin(s) and exposure chamber will provide an envi-ronment specifically designed to facilitate IPE testing needs. The exposure chamber is required to disseminate the CWAs, and generate a range of environmental condi-tions including variable temperature, wind speed, and humidity. The IPE Mannequin is required to be an anthropometrically dimensioned robot capable of performing human-like movements. A minimum of twenty-nine degrees of freedom will enable the IPE Mannequin to simulate various Warfighter activities, and may even have the capabil-ity to stand and walk on its own without external support. In addition to simulating human movements, the IPE Mannequin is also intended to replicate human breath-ing, sweating, and skin temperature. An array of sensors will be installed within the exposure chamber to moni-tor environmental conditions. A separate sensor system is planned for integration into the IPE Mannequin and will provide the capability to measure CWA concen-trations under the IPE in near real-time. These sensor systems coupled with the IPE Mannequin will generate performance profiles and allow the Chemical and Biological Defense community to examine CWA penetration versus time for IPE. A robotic system, such as the IPE Mannequin System, has several benefits for IPE testing. Test durations can be increased because a robot never tires, and robotic systems can be designed to func-tion in a CWA environment without put-

By Richard CassingJPM NBCCA PDTESS

The robotic mannequin Private Paul performs an IPE test at the Natick Soldier Center, Massachusetts.

Phot

o co

urte

sy o

f Nat

ick

Sold

ier C

ente

r Pub

lic A

ffairs

Offi

ce.

www.jpeocbd.osd.mil

JPEO-CBD

��

ting anyone in danger. Robotic systems also provide programmable movements that are repeatable. Different series of test movements can be strung together to create custom tests and those tests can be run again and again with no variation in how the movements are executed. Finally, robotic systems provide a platform for the placement of chemical sensors to monitor the concentration of CWA under the IPE. Today there are some robotic systems used for system level testing of IPE. These systems are capable of reproducing a limited set of human-like movements, but: lack the range of motion to perform movements of interest for IPE testing (i.e. squatting and lateral movements of the arms and legs), do not have true anthro-pometric dimensions, and require the modification of IPE components because of external attachments for power and support. These systems no longer rep-resent the state of the art in robotic and under-ensemble sensing technologies. The IPE Mannequin’s range of motion and more accurate anthropometric shape will provide a better simulation of human movement and enable the Chemical and Biological community to conduct more effective testing. The current method used for system level IPE testing is the Man-In-Simulant Test (MIST). The MIST assesses the effectiveness of IPE in a simulated CWA environment. Instead of CWA, a benign compound known as Methyl Salicylate (MeS) is used. During the MIST, test par-ticipants wear Passive Adsorbent Devices (PADs) in pre-defined locations under their IPE and perform specific exercises in a chamber while being exposed to a controlled concentration of MeS vapor. The MeS is extracted from the PADs and quantified following each test. The data from the MIST is then used to assess the performance of the IPE system. One limitation of the MIST capability is that it provides only a single data point for the MeS penetration at each PAD location on the test participant’s body for a two hour test period. The individual doses are combined to obtain the total dose mea-sured. The total dose measurement does not provide a performance profile for IPE. The IPE Mannequin’s data acquisition system will show chemical penetration over time because of the near real-time under ensemble sampling. This data can be used to generate performance profiles for IPE and identify specific movements

responsible for chemical penetration. The IPE Mannequin System is going to improve IPE testing in another way. The MIST has inherent variability in test data because test participants are often differ-ent from test to test. Each test participant is a different size and performs the MIST exercises with variations. The variability complicates the evaluation of IPE perfor-mance. The IPE Mannequin’s capability to repeatedly execute identical movements will address variability associated with the MIST. This repeatability will provide a stable benchmark for IPE performance. Finally, the MIST relies on the simu-lant MeS. The correlation between MeS

and CWA penetration is not fully defined leading to questions about how well the MIST measures IPE performance against an actual threat. Those questions have created the need for a system level test capability for IPE in CWA. The IPE Mannequin System is intended to provide this capability. The National Academy of Sciences (NAS) recently completed a feasibil-ity study for the IPE Mannequin. The feasibility study evaluated the possibility of incorporating all of the desired features into a single mannequin system. The NAS determined that the ability to provide this needed test capability with today’s tech-nologies is possible, but significant effort

is required to combine all of the capabili-ties into a single mannequin system. PD TESS has used the information provided by the NAS, as well as input from the IPE test community, to shape the IPE Mannequin’s performance requirements to provide a feasible system. The IPE Mannequin System will surpass the performance of current mannequin systems and address the limitations of the MIST. The IPE Mannequin System will provide new tools for the T&E commu-nity: a repeatable IPE system level test in CWA and the ability to generate perfor-mance profiles for IPE.

�0


Jan - Mar �008

‘The Reason for Our Successis Our People.’


Lt. Col. Vince Johnston was promoted Friday, Nov. �0, �00� at a ceremony attended by his wife Pamela and his father, Steven who commanded the same Army Chemical Company �� years prior to his son taking command. 1st Lt. Steven Johnston com-manded the ��th Chemical Company at Ft Benning, GA in 1��. Under his command, the Army inactivated the unit and retired the colors. In 1��, Capt. Vince Johnson was Commander of the ��th Chemical Company in Budingen, Germany when he was notified the unit would reflag into the 69th. Since the 69th was still inactivated, First Armored Division flew retired Lt. Col. Steven Johnston to Germany for the reflagging ceremony, where he passed the Guidon to his son.


www.jpeocbd.osd.mil

JPEO-CBD

�1


The Department of Defense authorized the US Army to purchase �� additional Stryker Nuclear, Biological, Chemical Reconnaissance Vehicles (NBCRV), augmenting the 10 already in the field. The decision was announced during a Media Day ceremony at the Pentagon, where media rep-resentatives and invited guests spoke to Soldiers and officers involved with the Stryker NBCRV program. Guests also toured a Stryker NBCRV displayed in the Pentagon’s Center Courtyard. Maj. Gen. Stephen V. Reeves, the Joint Program Executive Officer for Chemical and Biological Defense, attended, and Brig. Gen. Thomas Spoehr, the Commandant of the U.S. Army Chemical, Biological, Radiological and Nuclear School at Fort Leonard Wood, Mo., spoke during the Media Day. Col. Kyle Burke, Joint Project Manager for Nuclear Biological Chemical Contamination Avoidance, was the Master of Ceremony. His staff contributed significantly to the success of this important recognition of increased capability to Warfighters which will ultimately enhance survivability.

�� Jan - Mar �008


Documents

New Chemical Test Facility Planned for Edgewood Chemical