National Academies Press: OpenBook
« Previous: 2 Background
Suggested Citation:"Annex Brief Descriptions of SHAD Tests." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Assessing Health Outcomes Among Veterans of Project SHAD (Shipboard Hazard and Defense). Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/21846.
×

Annex

Brief Descriptions of SHAD Tests

The Department of Defense (DoD) has identified 21 Project SHAD tests that were conducted between 1963 and 1973. A total of 39 tests had been planned for Project SHAD, but 18 tests were cancelled. The summaries that follow describe essential features of each of the tests that were conducted. This information is drawn from redacted technical and final reports on the tests that have been made public, from the DoD Fact Sheets for each test that were based on those materials,1 and from spreadsheets with additional detail on the trials within each test that were provided to the Institute of Medicine by DoD (DoD, 2004). Where the information is available, each summary provides the name, dates, location, number of trials, substances used, and ships involved. Procedures, use of decontaminants, or use of protective gear are noted when that information was reported in the available documents. The tests are presented in the order in which they took place and the source documents are listed with each test summary.

These descriptions closely follow or quote the original technical reports or other sources where indicated.

Eager Belle I (Test 63-1)

January, March 1963

The Eager Belle I test consisted of 17 exposure trials and was carried out in the Pacific Ocean west of Oahu, Hawaii. The test was intended “to evaluate the effectiveness of selected protective devices in preventing penetration of a naval ship by a biological aerosol,” and “to compare the efficiency of the M-17 and the Mark V protective masks against a biological aerosol” (DTC, 1965, p. iii).

The test used Bacillus globigii (BG),2 and the test ship was the USS George Eastman. For each of 17 trials (9 in January, 8 in March), BG was disseminated from the stern of a tugboat over a 10-minute period. Fog oil was also discharged to provide a visible tracer of the release. The George Eastman steamed 500 yards behind the tugboat, striving to remain within the aerosol

______________

1 The DoD Fact Sheets for Project SHAD tests (and Project 112 tests) are available at http://www.health.mil/Military-Health-Topics/Health-Readiness/Environmental-Exposures/Project-112SHAD/Fact-Sheets (accessed September 23, 2015).

2 The majority of the SHAD tests involved use of an aerosol containing the organism referred to then—and in this report—as Bacillus globigii (BG). This organism has also been known as Bacillus subtilis var. niger and is currently typically referred to as Bacillus atrophaeus.

Suggested Citation:"Annex Brief Descriptions of SHAD Tests." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Assessing Health Outcomes Among Veterans of Project SHAD (Shipboard Hazard and Defense). Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/21846.
×

cloud. Trials were carried out under four different ventilation conditions. Samplers were positioned on the exterior and interior of the ship to evaluate penetration of the aerosol under the different ventilation conditions.

Source:

DTC (Deseret Test Center). 1965. Eager Belle (U), Phase I (Revised). DTC Final Report, Test 63-1. 30 June. Redacted excerpts from cover, pp. iii, iv, 5, 6, 37-39, 70. DMMC Control #2001235-0000009, DMMC Control #2000300-0000012. Fort Douglas, UT: Deseret Test Center.

Eager Belle II

February, March, June 1963

The Eager Belle Phase II test consisted of 14 exposure trials and was conducted in the Pacific Ocean, roughly 175 miles west of Oahu, Hawaii. BG was used to study the downwind travel of biological aerosols. Testers sought “to relate biological aerosol cloud travel to predicted cloud travel based on present prediction models for prevailing conditions,” “to obtain additional information on weapon system performance … over the open sea under the meteorological conditions encountered,” and “to obtain information to assist in the design and execution of future trials” (DTC, n.d., p. 2). An additional objective was to evaluate, in environmental conditions, the performance of a particle-size analyzer that was under development.

For Eager Belle Phase II trials, BG was released as a line source generated by Aero 14B spray tanks mounted on A4 series jet attack aircraft. For the first 11 trials, the USS George Eastman was the test ship and carried the sampling devices. For the last three trials, the samplers were aboard the USS Navarro, USS Tioga County, and USS Carpenter, all of which participated in the three trials. Trials included downwind testing at short and longer distances from the line source. The operating conditions of the ships were not recorded in the final report but were inferred to be Zebra by those at DoD who reviewed the reports in 2004 (DoD, 2004).

Sources:

DoD (Department of Defense). 2004 (unpublished). SHAD test information. Provided to the Institute of Medicine in response to an information request submitted by Susanne Stoiber, Executive Officer, Institute of Medicine, to William Winkenwerder, Assistant Secretary of Defense for Health Affairs, Department of Defense. Washington, DC.

DTC. n.d. Eager Belle, Phase 2. DCT Test 63-1, Technical Report. Redacted excerpts from pages iii, iv, 2-5. Distributed by Defense Technical Information Center, Alexandria, VA.

Autumn Gold (Test 63-2)

May 1963

The Autumn Gold test was carried out in open sea in the Pacific Ocean approximately 60 miles west-southwest of Oahu, Hawaii, and it used BG as a test substance. Its purpose was “to determine the degree of penetration of representative fleet ships, operating under three different material readiness conditions, by a simulant biological aerosol released from an operational weapon system” (DTC, 1964, p. iii). Another objective was “to estimate the magnitude and persistency of simulant biological aerosols retained after conducting air wash and hose down procedures” (DTC, 1964, p. 3). The test also provided information on the performance of equipment, including the M17 and Mark V protective masks (DTC, 1964, p. 3).

Suggested Citation:"Annex Brief Descriptions of SHAD Tests." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Assessing Health Outcomes Among Veterans of Project SHAD (Shipboard Hazard and Defense). Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/21846.
×

The test included nine trials and was conducted in three phases of three trials each, testing the Yoke, Zebra, and Zebra Circle William material conditions (DoD, 2004). The participating ships were the USS Navarro, USS Tioga County, USS Carpenter, and USS Hoel. The USS Hoel did not participate in the last two trials. In each trial, two A4B jet aircraft, each equipped with two modified Aero 14B spray tanks, disseminated BG along a release line.

According to the final report, “Personnel on each ship were briefed on procedures for pretrial exercises and the need was stressed for attaining the three material readiness conditions during the pretrial training exercises and subsequent trials. Ship personnel conducted these exercises and inspections prior to the AUTUMN GOLD (U) trials to determine each ship’s capability to fully attain these readiness conditions under its present condition…. Navy personnel from each ship were assigned to operate the various sampling equipment on the ship. These men were trained during the week prior to the first trial” (DTC, 1964, p. 7).

The following procedures to test for potential for leakage of the M17 and Mark V protective masks under operational conditions were described in the test plan: “In each trial of AUTUMN GOLD, 32 test subjects (eight per ship, four at each of two stations per ship) will be positioned at two above deck sampling sites. Sixteen test subjects will don the M17 protective mask and 16 subjects will don the Mark V protective mask at function time and continue wearing the masks until Z+35 minutes [35 minutes after release]” (DTC, 1963, p. 74).

The test plan also states that “all test subjects not wearing the oronasal mask and all test subject controls will provide a gargle sample prior to function time and again immediately after Z+35 minutes. All gargle samples and the oronasal masks will be assayed on the laboratory ship YAG 40. Leakage of the protective masks will be determined by analysis of the data” (DTC, 1963, p. 74).

Roles for a test site safety officer and medical liaison are outlined in the test plan, with the comment that “the major objective of the medical support program is to maintain the health and welfare of both military and civilian personnel while on the test site and during test operation” (DTC, 1963, p. 80).

Sources:

DTC. 1963. Autumn Gold (U). Test Plan 63-2, Revision 1, April. Redacted excerpts from cover, pp. 2, 7, 9, 11, 12, 14-16, 21, 23, 31, 74, 77, 79-81, 86-91, 93-95. AD 352693. Fort Douglas, UT: Deseret Test Center.

DTC. 1964. Autumn Gold (U). DTC Final Report, Test 63-2. May. Redacted excerpts from cover, pp. i, iii, v-x, unnumbered drawing, 1-3, 5-7, A1-A4, D1-D2, E1-E2, F1-F4. AD 350542-064. Fort Douglas, UT: Deseret Test Center.

Errand Boy (Test 64-1)

September 1963

Errand Boy was carried out aboard the USS George Eastman while it was moored at Buoy X-9 in East Loch, Pearl Harbor, Hawaii. Errand Boy was originally designed as an extension of the Eager Belle and Autumn Gold tests to obtain similar data about the relative efficiency of shipboard collective protection and ventilation systems, using the pathogenic test agents Pasteurella tularensis (P. tularensis, now designated Francisella tularensis) and Venezuelan equine encephalomyelitis virus instead of BG (DoD, 2003).

The original objectives of Errand Boy were to determine the degree to which “biological agent aerosols penetrate a ship’s interior and the extent of any associated surface contamination

Suggested Citation:"Annex Brief Descriptions of SHAD Tests." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Assessing Health Outcomes Among Veterans of Project SHAD (Shipboard Hazard and Defense). Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/21846.
×

hazard under various combinations of shipboard collective protection and ventilation systems; and to evaluate the effectiveness of various decontamination procedures for decontaminating exterior surfaces” (DoD, 2003). The penetration phase of the test was not conducted; as a result, the biological agents P. tularensis and Venezuelan equine encephalomyelitis virus were not disseminated.

Planning for the use of pathogenic biological agents for Errand Boy also included planning for decontamination. An engineering survey of the USS George Eastman was conducted by representatives of the Deseret Test Center (DTC), Chemical Research and Development Laboratories (CRDL), Naval Biological Laboratories (NBL), Project SHAD Technical Staff, and the USS George Eastman. Following the survey, modifications were made to the ship’s air circulation and ventilation system at Pearl Harbor Naval Shipyard. Systems qualification tests were carried out both in port and at sea in July and August 1963 (DTC, 1965).

Between September 6 and 17, eight decontamination trials were carried out “to attempt a demonstration of the effectiveness of betapropiolactone (BPL) as a disinfectant for the interior spaces of the ship” (DTC, 1965, p. 2). For each of the trials, patches impregnated with known numbers of BG microorganisms were placed in the zone of the ship being tested. BPL was used for the decontamination, with a standard dissemination time of 80 minutes in each zone (DoD, 2003). Personnel who were to enter areas with high concentrations of BPL vapor wore impermeable (rubber) clothing, and the test zones were closed to all other personnel (DoD, 2003; DTC, 1965, p. 17). The test location was selected to avoid downwind hazard to the shore in Hawaii (DTC, 1965).

After the BPL testing was completed, the medical and safety officer had to certify that air in the zone being decontaminated was free of BPL and safe to reoccupy for normal operations. (DTC, 1965).

Sources:

DoD. 2003. Fact sheet: Errand Boy, version 06-30-2003. http://www.health.mil/Reference-Center/Fact-Sheets/2003/06/30/Errand-Boy (accessed September 23, 2015).

DTC. 1965. Observations on ship decontamination (U). Technical Memorandum. November. Redacted excerpts from cover, abstract, pp. 2, 5, 6, 8, 16, 17, 32, 33. DMMC Control #2003154-0000031. Fort Douglas, UT: Deseret Test Center.

Flower Drum I (Test 64-2)

February-April, August-September 1964

The Flower Drum test was “designed to find a simulant for agent GB [sarin nerve agent], to assess shipboard vulnerability to an enveloping vapor of toxic agent, and to establish comparative penetration properties for [sarin nerve agent] simulant and agent” (DTC, 1965, p. iii). It included 31 trials and took place in the Pacific Ocean off the coast of Hawaii. The test ship was the USS George Eastman, which was described as a “specially designed and equipped test ship” (DTC, 1965, p. iii). The USS Granville S. Hall participated as an escort ship and laboratory resource.

Five initial trials were carried out between February and April 1964 and used sulfur dioxide (SO2) as a simulant (DoD, 2004; DTC, 1965, p. iv). After investigation of other simulant candidates, methyl acetoacetate (MAA) was selected and used in comprehensive, comparative trials during August and September 1964. Twenty-six trials used either the simulant MAA, sarin,

Suggested Citation:"Annex Brief Descriptions of SHAD Tests." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Assessing Health Outcomes Among Veterans of Project SHAD (Shipboard Hazard and Defense). Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/21846.
×

or a combination of MAA and sarin, and of these, nine trials used sarin nerve agent (DoD, 2004; DTC, 1965, pp. 22, 57).

The Flower Drum test involved evaluation of four test conditions and specific installed protective systems. Additional objectives for the Flower Drum test were to report information applicable to the Navy’s Chemical Training Program, and to obtain information on the performance of the E41 V-G agent alarm system, the hydrogen flame emission detector (HYFED) candidate point sampling alarms, and the passive long path infrared (LOPAIR) advance warning alarm (each modified for shipboard use) when exposed to a cloud of sarin nerve agent (DTC, 1965).

The final report on the test outlines the procedures for the trials (DTC, 1965). The USS George Eastman “steamed into the wind maintaining a relative wind speed of 10 to 30 knots. The [USS Granville S. Hall] maintained a parallel course forward and starboard of the [USS George Eastman]” (DTC, 1965, p. 11). Sarin nerve agent or a simulant (SO2 or MAA) was released only when the appropriate material condition was set and all personnel except the disseminator crew were within the safety citadel (a specially designated area of the test ship). The sarin or a stimulant was disseminated for 10 minutes at a rate that maintained an average concentration of approximately 50 mg/m3 at the forward deckhouse bulkhead. Dissemination was via a gas turbine on the bow or direct injection into the ventilation system intake.

During dissemination of sarin nerve agent, “the disseminator crew wore M5 protective ensembles and all other personnel (who were in the safety citadel) wore MK5, M7A1, or M17 protective masks. After dissemination, all personnel whose duties required them to leave the safety citadel wore protective masks until the ship was cleared of [sarin]. During the dissemination period of the simulant trials, all personnel wore protective masks” (DTC, 1965, p. 11).

The report on the test also states, “During test periods, the only entrance to or exit from the safety citadel was through a decontamination tunnel, which consisted of a passageway that functioned as an air-sweep tunnel for the decontamination facility and also as one of two primary ventilation exhausts for the safety citadel. The passageway was divided into four sections by perforated doors; the doors restricted the rate of airflow and maintained the interior/exterior pressure differential. The decontamination tunnel was outfitted with a gas chamber to be used [to check protective masks], shower facilities (not used during the test of vapor agents), and protective equipment and clothing removal facilities. All personnel worked in teams (or two or more persons), and all teams were checked in and out of the safety citadel” (DTC, 1965, p. 13).

Following the completion of sampling, the ship was fully aerated. For the sarin nerve agent trials, “aeration of the ship was continued until the enzyme ticket test of the M15A1 detector kit indicated there was no [sarin nerve agent] in the exhaust air” (DTC, 1965, p. 20). At that point, “properly protected personnel confirmed the absence of [sarin] within each area” by using the enzyme ticket test of the M15A1 detector kit (DTC, 1965, p. 20).

Additional information regarding training and equipment from the Flower Drum Phase I Final Report:

  1. Ship’s Crew Training Program: A detailed training program was administered to the ships’ companies (which were specially selected) … prior to the beginning of trials. The training program was [SHAD] oriented but gave fundamental training in basic [chemical warfare/weapons] CW principles. The results of the training were satisfactory; the crews
Suggested Citation:"Annex Brief Descriptions of SHAD Tests." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Assessing Health Outcomes Among Veterans of Project SHAD (Shipboard Hazard and Defense). Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/21846.
×
  1. were adequately prepared, and refresher and supplementary information and materials were not required. …

  2. Protective Gear:
  1. With regard to the M5 protective ensemble worn by the disseminator crew, the following was reported:
    1. … Because of the fragile character of certain M5 ensemble components, extreme care should be used in its handling and storage.
    2. Life support systems utilizing cryogenic liquid oxygen might prove invaluable in the tactical applications of CW weapons in the field. Elimination of “umbilical” type attachments would provide greater freedom of movement.
  2. Protective masks were worn by all personnel during all [sarin] trials; personnel in the Safety Citadel wore masks during dissemination and until the disseminator was cleared of agent. During the series of trials, MK5, M7A1, and M17 protective masks were used and found to be satisfactory; no recommendation is made. (DTC, 1965, p. 63)

Sources:

DoD. 2004 (unpublished). SHAD test information. Provided to the Institute of Medicine in response to an information request submitted by Susanne Stoiber, Executive Officer, Institute of Medicine, to William Winkenwerder, Assistant Secretary of Defense for Health Affairs, Department of Defense. Washington, DC.

DTC. 1965. Test 64-2—Flower Drum (U), Phase I. Final report—Revised. December. Redacted excerpts from cover, pp. iii, iv, 3-5, 7-9, 11, 13, 20, 22, 28, 57, 63. Rpt. No. DTC 642110R. Fort Douglas, UT: Deseret Test Center.

Shady Grove (Test 64-4)

Phase A: May 1964

Phases B, D: January-April 1965

The Shady Grove test took place in the Pacific Ocean and included a total of 25 ship-based trials that were conducted as Phases A, B, and D. (Phase C was conducted on land and is not discussed further here.) In addition to use of BG as a simulant for a biological warfare agent, the test included trials with the pathogenic agents Coxiella burnetii (OU), which causes Q fever, and Pasteurella tularensis (UL), which causes tularemia. Fluorescent particles of zinc cadmium sulfide (FP) were used as a tracer.

The stated objectives of the Shady Grove test were “1) To evaluate infectivity of Pasteurella tularensis (UL) aerosols over effective downwind distances, utilizing an elevated line source from an operational weapon in a marine environment. 2) To determine the viability decay of UL over effective downwind distances. 3) To characterize atmospheric diffusion in a marine environment. 4) To assess the operational capability of the weapon system” (DTC, 1965, p. 5).

The test ships for Shady Grove were five Army light tugs (LTs) (hull numbers 2080, 2081, 2085, 2086, and 2087), which carried samplers. For 19 of the trials, the test agents were released by an Aero 14B spray tank mounted on an A4C jet aircraft system, and in six trials the agents were released on the surface by a multi-nozzle E-2 disseminator on one of the tugs. The USS Granville S. Hall served as the laboratory support ship.

Suggested Citation:"Annex Brief Descriptions of SHAD Tests." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Assessing Health Outcomes Among Veterans of Project SHAD (Shipboard Hazard and Defense). Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/21846.
×

Phase A, conducted in May 1964 (DoD, 2004), was intended as “preliminary check of all test procedures prior to conducting the pathogenic agent phases and to obtain data to characterize diffusion in a marine environment” (DTC, 1966, p. 1). It took place in an area of open sea about 175 nautical miles southwest of Oahu, Hawaii, and included six aerial and two surface releases of BG (DTC, 1965, pp. 125, 187). For the aerial tests, the FP tracer was released at heights of 500 or 1000 feet above the sea surface, and BG was released by jet aircraft (DTC, 1965, pp. 125, 186) along each of two release lines. For the surface trials, a tug disseminated BG along an 8-mile release line (DTC, 1965, p. 187).

Phase B took place in February and March 1965, in a remote open-sea area, roughly 160 km southwest of Johnston Island. It included eight aerial releases of UL and BG together and one aerial release of UL only. For the aerial releases, jets carried two wing-mounted tanks; one tank released BG and the other UL for simultaneous dissemination along “each of one to three release lines ranging from 31 to 59 km in length” (DTC, 1965, p. 13) There were also four surface releases with both UL and BG. For each of the surface trials, a tug equipped with two E-2 multihead disseminators simultaneously disseminated UL from one head and BG from the other head along a 15-km release line (DTC, 1965, p. 13). FP was disseminated during this study to help in evaluating the meteorological conditions (DTC, 1965, pp. 6-7).

The four Phase D trials took place between March 22 and April 3, 1965, in open sea approximately 100 miles southwest of Johnston Island (DoD, 2003). A4C jets simultaneously disseminated tracer BG from one tank and OU from the other tank along several release lines (one aircraft per line). FP was also used as a tracer for this study (DTC, 1965, pp. 105, 127).

The final report includes the following statement: “Of the hundreds of personnel (Marine, Navy, Army, Air Force, and civilian) that participated in the conduct of these trials, no industrial type accidents or agent exposures resulted, thus indicating the exceptional job done in the training and execution of a test program of this magnitude by all participating personnel. It further confirmed the feasibility of using operational combat units, with a minimum amount of personnel training and experience, to deliver biological weapons on targets from remote bases throughout the world” (DTC, 1965, p. 97).

Sources:

DoD. 2003. Fact sheet: Shady Grove (revised), version 12-2-2003. http://www.health.mil/Reference-Center/Fact-Sheets/2003/12/02/Shady-Grove-Revised (accessed September 23, 2015).

DoD. 2004 (unpublished). SHAD test information. Provided to the Institute of Medicine in response to an information request submitted by Susanne Stoiber, Executive Officer, Institute of Medicine, to William Winkenwerder, Assistant Secretary of Defense for Health Affairs, Department of Defense. Washington, DC.

DTC. 1965. Test 64-4—Shady Grove (U), Final Report. December. Redacted excerpts from cover, pp. iii-v, viii, ix, 5-7, 9, 11, 13, 22, 28, 96, 97, 105, 113, 125, 127, 185-187, 205, 206, 209, 215, 216, 221, 222. DMMC Control #2003272-0000004. Fort Douglas, UT: Deseret Test Center.

DTC. 1966. Test 64-4 Shady Grove (U), Final Report. June. Redacted excerpts from cover, pp. 1, 2, 7. AD 500839. Fort Douglas, UT: Deseret Test Center.

Flower Drum II (Test 64-2)

November-December 1964

The Flower Drum II test was carried out at sea in the Pacific Ocean off the coast of Oahu, Hawaii, and included 10 trials. Its purpose was “1) to investigate the effectiveness of a shipboard

Suggested Citation:"Annex Brief Descriptions of SHAD Tests." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Assessing Health Outcomes Among Veterans of Project SHAD (Shipboard Hazard and Defense). Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/21846.
×

water washdown, both as a protective and as a decontaminant measure, against agent VX delivered from a mechanism that simulates aerial spray. 2) to obtain data and operational experience to contribute to the planning and operation of Fearless Johnny”3 (DTC, 1965, p. 3).

The platform for the test was the US Navy covered lighter (barge) YFN-811, which was towed during the trials by the US Navy tug ATF 105. The barge was towed approximately 1 km behind the tug. A spray device on the barge disseminated the test agent, which was a dyed liquid containing approximately 90 percent VX (by weight). Radioactive “tagged VX” molecules containing the radioactive isotope phosphorus 32 were included in the agent. Bis (2 ethyl-hexyl) hydrogen phosphite was also used in this test as a simulant (DoD, 2002).

The final report describes tests of variations in timing of water washdown to determine their effectiveness in providing protection and decontamination against simulated, aerial delivery of agent VX (DTC, 1965).

The SHAD I report (IOM, 2007) noted that according to the information received from DoD, no individuals could be assigned to this test.

Sources:

DoD. 2002. Fact sheet: Flower Drum, Phase II, version 05-23-2002. http://www.health.mil/Reference-Center/Fact-Sheets/2002/05/23/Flower-Drum-Phase-II (accessed September 28, 2015).

DTC. 1965. Test 64-2, Flower Drum (U), Phase II, Final Report. October. Rpt. No. DTC 642105R. Redacted excerpts from cover, pp. iii, 1-3, 5, 7. Fort Douglas, UT: Deseret Test Center.

IOM (Institute of Medicine). 2007. Long-term health effects of participation in Project SHAD (Shipboard Hazard and Defense). Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

Copper Head (Test 65-1)

January-February 1965

The Copper Head test was carried out in the Atlantic Ocean in international waters off the coast of Newfoundland, Canada, and included 10 trials. The test ship was the USS Power (DD 839), and the test agent was BG, with FP used as well.

The Copper Head test was intended to determine the extent of aerosol penetration (related to particle size) into an operational ship under three conditions of readiness in a frigid environment. It was also intended to compare the travel of a biological cloud in a frigid marine environment with the travel predicted by diffusion models (DTC, 1966, p. 2).

The secondary objectives of the test included determining, in a frigid marine environment, if (a) passage of a ship through biological aerosols resulted in contamination of exterior and interior surfaces, (b) a system to spray betapropiolactone could be used under operational conditions to decontaminate an interior ship’s compartment after exposure to a biological aerosol, and (c) the use of an installed exterior deck washdown system was operationally feasible. An additional aim for the test was to obtain information on the performance in the test environment of an Aero-14B-spray tank jet aircraft weapon system that was used to disseminate BG (DTC, 1966).

The final report indicates that in one of the trials, the aerosols missed the target ship (DTC, 1966). In the publicly available materials no details are provided about the use of betapropriolactone to decontaminate the ship.

______________

3 Fearless Johnny was another SHAD test.

Suggested Citation:"Annex Brief Descriptions of SHAD Tests." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Assessing Health Outcomes Among Veterans of Project SHAD (Shipboard Hazard and Defense). Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/21846.
×

Source:

DTC. 1966. Test 65-1—Copper Head (U), Final Report. March. Redacted excerpts from cover, pp. iii, iv, 2, 3, 5, 8. Rpt. No. DTC 65110BR. Fort Douglas, UT: Deseret Test Center.

High Low (Test 65-13)

January-February 1965

The High Low test took place in the Pacific Ocean off the coast of San Diego. The 33 trials used methyl acetoacetate (MAA) as a simulant to investigate the potential penetration of a cloud of the nerve agent sarin into naval ships.4 Four ship types were involved: a FRAM MK I destroyer (USS Fechteler, DD-870), a guided missile destroyer (USS Berkeley, DDG-15), a landing ship, tank (USS Wexford County, LST-1168), and an attack personnel transport (USS Okanogan, APA-220). Each ship was tested under three material readiness conditions. The simulant was disseminated from a turbine disseminator located on the bow of the test ship.

According to information provided by DoD (2004) from ship logs, the USS Wexford County participated in 6 trials during the period January 11-15, the USS Okanogan participated in 9 trials (3 at each of three material readiness conditions) between January 22 and January 26, the USS Berkeley participated in 9 trials (3 at each of three material readiness conditions) between February 8 and February 11, and the USS Fechteler participated in 9 trials (3 at each of three material readiness conditions) between February 23 and February 26.

The final test report states that “all personnel (ships’ crews and civilian test personnel) were instructed in the use of the protective mask, and masks were worn by personnel directly exposed to significant quantities of MAA” (DTC, 1966, p. 9).

Sources:

DoD. 2003. Fact sheet: High Low, version 3-4-2003. http://www.health.mil/Reference-Center/Fact-Sheets/2003/03/04/High-Low (accessed October 2, 2015).

DoD. 2004 (unpublished). SHAD test information. Provided to the Institute of Medicine in response to an information request submitted by Susanne Stoiber, Executive Officer, Institute of Medicine, to William Winkenwerder, Assistant Secretary of Defense for Health Affairs, Department of Defense. Washington, DC.

DTC. 1966. Test 65-13 High Low (U), Final Report. July. Redacted excerpts from cover, pp. iii, 3, 5, 6, 9, 48, 158-173. Fort Douglas, UT: Deseret Test Center.

Magic Sword (Test 65-4)

May 1965

The eight trials of the Magic Sword test were carried out on the USS George Eastman off the coast of Baker Island in the Pacific Ocean, and on Baker Island. The test was intended to study the feasibility of offshore release of Aedes aegypti mosquitoes and to obtain information on mosquito biting habits, trap technology, and operational and logistical problems associated with delivering mosquitoes to remote sites (DTC, 1966).

Uninfected mosquitoes were used for the test. Mosquitoes were released from the USS George Eastman shortly after dawn, and trap recoveries were checked at 3, 12, and 24 hours

______________

4 The agent–simulant relationship of MAA to sarin nerve agent had been evaluated and established in the Flower Drum Phase I test carried out in August-September 1964 (DTC 1966CH). No sarin was used in the High Low test (DoD, 2003).

Suggested Citation:"Annex Brief Descriptions of SHAD Tests." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Assessing Health Outcomes Among Veterans of Project SHAD (Shipboard Hazard and Defense). Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/21846.
×

after the release. Volunteers from the crew of the George Eastman participated in mosquito-biting trials on the 380-acre island (DTC, 1966).

In the evening after each trial, the area was sprayed with a nonpersistent insecticide using a Todd insecticide fog apparatus (TIFA) mounted on an “Army Mule” vehicle. Traps were inspected prior to the next trial to insure the effectiveness of the eradication. The final trial was conducted offshore (4.8-kilometer release). As the final step, the entire island was sprayed, using the fog apparatus and nonpersistent insecticide, and all potential breeding areas were sprayed with a 5 percent suspension of DDT in water applied by hand sprayers. Aboard the USS George Eastman, a combination of high heat (120°F) and insecticide were used to eradicate the mosquitoes (DTC, 1966).

Source:

DTC. 1966. Test 65-4—Magic Sword (U). May. Redacted excerpts from pp. iii, iv, 5, 8, 9, number covered, 89, 90. Fort Douglas, UT: Deseret Test Center.

Big Tom (Test 65-6)

April-June 1965

The Big Tom test consisted of at least 19 trials carried out on the island of Oahu, Hawaii, and in the nearby waters and airspace. The test was intended to evaluate the feasibility of a biological attack on a tropical or jungle island complex and to evaluate Marine Corps doctrine and tactics for delivery of such an attack (DoD, 2003, 2004; DTC, 1967).

The final report on Big Tom describes it as being carried out in two phases (Phases A and B). In both phases, the simulant BG was released along with a tracer (DTC, 1967). In the Phase A trials, liquid BG and the tracer were disseminated from an Aero 14B spray tank mounted on a US Navy A-4 aircraft upwind from Oahu at varying heights and distances. In the Phase B trials, dry BG was released from an A/B Y45-4 spray tank mounted on a US Air Force F-105 aircraft. In both phases contractor aircraft disseminated a tracer of yellow and green zinc cadmium sulfide along the same flight path. The USS Granville S. Hall collected meteorological data and provided laboratory support; the ship steamed upwind of the disseminated material to avoid contamination.

The portions of the Big Tom final report that have been made public do not mention participation of a submarine or ships in the test. However, the participation of the submarine USS Carbonero is noted in the DoD (2003) Fact Sheet for this test, and it is also mentioned in the final report for DTC Test 68-71, Folded Arrow (DTC, 1969). That document notes that “a preliminary test, conducted in April 1965, consisted of two biological tracer (BG) trials which were designed to demonstrate the feasibility of [a submarine disseminating] system and, equally important, to determine the biological-contamination hazard to which the submarine crew would be subjected in operating the system” (DTC, 1969, pp. 4-5). The April 1965 trials, use of BPL as a “neutralizer,” and participation of the USS Carbonero are also noted in portions of a redacted report on the test from the Navy (U.S. Naval Ordnance Test Station, 1965).

Sources:

DoD. 2003. Fact sheet: Big Tom, version 6-30-2003. http://www.health.mil/Reference-Center/Fact-Sheets/2003/06/30/Big-Tom-Update (accessed September 28, 2015).

Suggested Citation:"Annex Brief Descriptions of SHAD Tests." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Assessing Health Outcomes Among Veterans of Project SHAD (Shipboard Hazard and Defense). Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/21846.
×

DoD. 2004 (unpublished). SHAD test information. Provided to the Institute of Medicine in response to an information request submitted by Susanne Stoiber, Executive Officer, Institute of Medicine, to William Winkenwerder, Assistant Secretary of Defense for Health Affairs, Department of Defense. Washington, DC.

DTC. 1967. Test 65-6 Big Tom (U), Final report. January. Redacted excerpts from cover, pp. iii, 1-4, number covered, 6, 10, 14, 15, 20. Rpt. No. DTC 656126R. Fort Douglas, UT: Deseret Test Center.

DTC. 1969. Test 68-71, Final report. March. Redacted excerpts from cover, pp. i, iii, iv, 1, 2, 4-6, 32, 34, number covered, 43, 44, 53, 54, 56, 57. Rpt. No. DTC 6871166R. Fort Douglas, UT: Deseret Test Center.

U.S. Naval Ordnance Test Station. 1965. Big Tom test report for Project 777. 24 June. Redacted excerpts from cover memorandum, pp. 1, 2, 5, 7, 8. China Lake, CA: U.S. Naval Ordnance Test Station.

Fearless Johnny (Test 65-17)

August, September 1965

Fearless Johnny was carried out in the Pacific Ocean southwest of Honolulu and involved 17 trials. The test agents were the nerve agent VX or its simulant, diethylphthalate (DEP), combined with 0.1 percent of fluorescent dye DF-504. The target ship was the USS George Eastman. Two of the light tugs served as couriers, transferring test samples between the USS George Eastman and support vessels. The agents were disseminated by aircraft (Navy A4-Bs) stationed at an airfield (Bonham) on the Island of Kauai. The USS Granville S. Hall provided laboratory support (DoD, 2004; DTC, 1966).

According to the redacted final report, the Fearless Johnny test was intended to “(1) evaluate … the magnitude of exterior and interior contamination levels under three material readiness conditions, (2) demonstrate the effectiveness of the shipboard water washdown system as a protective and decontaminant measure against VX spray, and (3) evaluate the operational impact of gross VX contamination on a U.S. Navy ship” (DTC, 1966, p. iii).

The 14 trials using the simulant DEP were carried out from August 8 to August 25, 1965, under three material readiness conditions: Yoke, Zebra, and Zebra Circle William (DTC, 1966). The three trials with VX were carried out September 10, 14, and 19 under the material readiness condition of “Zebra Circle William maximum security” (DoD, 2004).

Sources:

DoD. 2004 (unpublished). SHAD test information. Provided to the Institute of Medicine in response to an information request submitted by Susanne Stoiber, Executive Officer, Institute of Medicine, to William Winkenwerder, Assistant Secretary of Defense for Health Affairs, Department of Defense. Washington, DC.

DTC. 1966. Test 65-17—Fearless Johnny (U), Final report. November. Redacted excerpts from cover, pp. iii, iv, 3, 5, 7, 34. Rpt. No. DTC 6517125R. Fort Douglas, UT: Deseret Test Center.

Purple Sage (Test 66-5)

January-February, 1966

Purple Sage consisted of 21 trials in which methyl acetoacetate (MAA) was used to simulate the envelopment of the test ship USS Herbert J. Thomas by sarin nerve agent. The test was carried out in the Pacific Ocean off the coast of San Diego, California. The test was designed to evaluate the effectiveness of the experimental Shipboard Toxicological Operational Protection System (STOPS) against attack with a gaseous chemical warfare agent in operational

Suggested Citation:"Annex Brief Descriptions of SHAD Tests." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Assessing Health Outcomes Among Veterans of Project SHAD (Shipboard Hazard and Defense). Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/21846.
×

situations (DTC, 1967). Another objective was to evaluate the effect that wearing a protective mask (MK5 or M17) for a 4-hour period had on the operational efficiency of a ship’s crew.

MAA was disseminated through a turbine disseminator located on the bow of the test ship.

No information is provided about ship washdown.

Source:

DTC. 1967. Test 66-5—Purple Sage (U), Final report. January Redacted excerpts from cover, pp. iii, 5, 7. Rpt. No. DTC 6650130. Fort Douglas, UT: Deseret Test Center.

Scarlet Sage (Test 66-6)

February-March 1966

The Scarlet Sage test consisted of 19 trials that were carried out in the Pacific Ocean, off the coast of San Diego, California. The objective of this test was “to evaluate the effectiveness of the Shipboard Toxicological Operational Protective System (STOPS) against an envelopment attack of a biological aerosol” (DTC, 1967, p. iii).

For the trials, the biological aerosol simulant BG was released from a continuous point source 500 meters upwind from the target vessel, the USS Herbert J. Thomas, during a 10-minute period. The test included both aerial and surface release trials. Surface releases were from an E-2 BW dissemination system mounted on the AVR boat North Island. The data collected from aerial releases were reported as too low to read (DoD, 2004), which may mean the results were below the limit of detection of the samplers.

Other objectives for the test included determining the degree of aerosol penetration into closed but unpressurized areas of the ship; comparing the results with similar ships without STOPS, taking into account the ventilation characteristics; determining the degree of exterior and interior contamination of surfaces and evaluating the exterior water washdown system; and evaluating “the nasal pharyngeal-wash technique as a method for detecting the inhalation of biological aerosols” by exposed personnel (DTC, 1967, p. 5).

A set of data labeled “Personnel Swab Results” for 24 people shows that some of these personnel tested positive for BG after aerosol exposure, and that some of them had a positive result for a swab taken after a shower (DTC, 1967, pp. 72-74).

Sources:

DoD. 2004 (unpublished). SHAD test information. Provided to the Institute of Medicine in response to an information request submitted by Susanne Stoiber, Executive Officer, Institute of Medicine, to William Winkenwerder, Assistant Secretary of Defense for Health Affairs, Department of Defense. Washington, DC.

DTC. 1967. Test 66-6—Scarlet Sage (U), Final report. April. Redacted excerpts from cover, pp. iii, iv, 5, 7, 13, 14, 18, 72-74. Rpt. No. DTC 6661339. Fort Douglas, UT: Deseret Test Center.

Half Note (Test 66-13)

August, September 1966

The Half Note test took place in the open Pacific Ocean, approximately 80 miles south-southwest of Oahu. It involved at least 27 trials. The biological test agents used were Bacillus globigii (BG), Serratia marcescens (SM), and Escherichia coli (EC), with use of the tracers calcofluor (fluorescent brightener 28) and zinc cadmium sulfide (DoD, 2003). The USS George

Suggested Citation:"Annex Brief Descriptions of SHAD Tests." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Assessing Health Outcomes Among Veterans of Project SHAD (Shipboard Hazard and Defense). Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/21846.
×

Eastman and five light tugs (hull numbers 2080, 2082, 2085, 2086, and 2087) were target ships, with aerial dissemination of the test agents BG, SM, and EC by an A-4 aircraft and surface releases of BG from the submarine USS Carbonero. The USS Granville S. Hall provided laboratory support.

Half Note was “designed to determine biological decay rates of nonpathogenic organisms—Escherichia coli (EC) and Seratia marcescens (SM)—in a marine environment” for comparison with chamber decay rates (DTC, 1968, p. iii). For each trial, either EC or SM was released with a BG slurry. Specifically, Group A trials consisted of EC and BG, Group B of SM and BG, and Group C of EC (made through a different process than the material used in Group A) and BG. The BG also contained 1 percent phenol. For three of the Group B trials, calcofluor was added to the BG slurry (1 percent by weight). Group E used a new test concept of directly releasing the test agents over the test ship (USS George Eastman). FP was used as a tracer (DTC, 1968).

The DoD Fact Sheet notes the use of the USS Carbonero to disseminate BG in this test (DoD, 2003). The redacted version of the final report does not include this information, but the final report for the Folded Arrow test states (DTC, 1969, p. 5), “In September, 1966, the submarine weapon system disseminated a nonpathogenic biological aerosol against the downwind sampling array established for DTC Test 66-13, HALF NOTE.”

The DoD Fact Sheet states that in each trial, the USS George Eastman and tugs would “traverse upwind attempting to remain in the aerosol cloud for several hours” (DoD, 2003, p. 1). The final report (DTC, 1968) suggests that this was done only for three of the trials (Group E).

Half Note testing included evaluating the contamination hazards to the crew of the submarine USS Carbonero, which was equipped with a biological weapon system. A portion of a related report (U.S. Naval Weapons Laboratory, n.d., pp. 36-37) notes that “[d]econtamination was performed in the mix area, transfer area, topside boat area, and for the nozzle.” The decontamination solution was calcium hypochlorite (HTH) in water. Final decontamination of the mix area was described as a 20-minute spray of BPL, “after which the contents of the van were allowed to soak for 24 hours” (U.S. Naval Weapons Laboratory, n.d., p. 38).

Sources:

DoD. 2003. Fact sheet: Half Note, version 6-30-2003. http://www.health.mil/Reference-Center/Fact-Sheets/2002/10/09/Half-Note (accessed September 28, 2015).

DTC. 1968. Test 66-13 (U). March. Redacted excerpts from pp. iii, 1, 6, 7, 11, 15-17, 28, 31, 32, 40. Fort Douglas, UT: Deseret Test Center.

DTC. 1969. Test 68-71, Final report. March. Redacted excerpts from cover, pp. i, iii, iv, 1, 2, 4-6, 32, 34, number covered, 43, 44, 53, 54, 56, 57. Rpt. No. DTC 6871166R. Fort Douglas, UT: Deseret Test Center.

U.S. Naval Weapons Laboratory. n.d. Project 777 contamination hazards assessment (CHA): Test report. Redacted excerpts from cover memo, pp. 1, 36-38. China Lake, CA: U.S. Naval Ordnance Test Station.

Folded Arrow (Test 68-71)

April, May 1968, with additional contamination hazard assessment trials in July, 1968

The Folded Arrow test took place near Oahu, Hawaii, using BG as a simulant for Venezuelan equine encephalitis virus (FX). It included 11 trials (DoD, 2004). The test was designed and conducted to provide “a basis upon which the U.S. Navy could recommend use of

Suggested Citation:"Annex Brief Descriptions of SHAD Tests." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Assessing Health Outcomes Among Veterans of Project SHAD (Shipboard Hazard and Defense). Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/21846.
×

the submarine-biological disseminator weapon system for dissemination of agent FX” (DTC, 1969, p. 1). The tests were carried out after midnight to avoid destruction of the BG by sunlight.

The objective of the test “was to study over-ocean downwind travel of a biological aerosol material when disseminated from a submarine-biological system and to relate these data” to likely rates of infection from FX (DTC, 1969, p. 5). The participating ships are identified as the submarine the USS Carbonero, five light tugs, and the USS Granville S. Hall (DoD, 2003).

The six Group A trials (one was repeated because of an apparent failure) were conducted in the Pacific Ocean approximately 80 nautical miles south-southwest of Oahu. The five tugs, each of which had two sampling sites, were stationed in predetermined locations along the downwind path of the BG aerosol.

Group B and C trials used the submarine disseminator to test exposures on land. The two Group B trials, both conducted in the northern half of Oahu, were intended “to demonstrate, in terms of FX-casualty estimates, the capability of the submarine weapon system to carry out an effective biological attack against an island complex…. Sampling stations were established at 15 locations selected to best depict movement of the aerosol cloud across the island” (DTC, 1969, p. 32). The two Group C trials were intended “to study effects, in terms of estimated FX casualties, of a biological attack against a naval port facility” (DTC, 1969, p. 43). In these trials, the submarine disseminated BG along a line off-shore from Kaneohe Marine Corps Air Station on Oahu.

The Folded Arrow test also included an “elaborate evaluation program” designed to determine the contamination hazard to the submarine and crew associated with the biological dissemination system (DTC, 1969, p. 53). The evaluation “consisted primarily of aerosol and contact (swab) samples taken from numerous points inside and outside the submarine before, during, and after aerosol dissemination. Procedures to avoid contamination were developed for those shipboard personnel associated with the systems operation, especially critical for topside, posttrial decontamination exercises” (DTC, 1969, p. 53). The final report states that the contamination hazard assessment (CHA) program was also conducted “in conjunction with all previous DTC tests with the submarine system and many more times during special tests. Results demonstrated that interior contamination of the submarine is not a problem so long as prescribed procedures for the system’s operation and maintenance are followed” (DTC, 1969, p. 53). The scope of the CHA was limited to the hazard “to personnel conducting the agent tank-filling operation and to shipboard personnel during operation of the weapon system. Interior and exterior assessments were made before, during, and after system operation” ( DTC, 1969, p. 54).

The Results section of the redacted final report notes the following:

  1. Although small amounts of contamination were encountered during the 68-71 trials, it was attributed to personnel error and to ineffectiveness of Calcium Hypo-Chlorite (HTH) as a decontaminant of exterior surfaces with [sic] HTH was effective in concentrations of 6,000 to 7,500 ppm.
  2. Additional CHA trials in July 68 (following completion of 68-71 trials) were conducted under strict tactical conditions. Beta-propiolactone (BPL), used in lieu of HTH, was found to be highly effective in decontaminating the cloud system. No trace of BPL vapor was detected within the submarine during the decontaminant tank-filling operation, or during the system decontamination phase accomplished while under way. (DTC, 1969, pp. 56-57)
Suggested Citation:"Annex Brief Descriptions of SHAD Tests." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Assessing Health Outcomes Among Veterans of Project SHAD (Shipboard Hazard and Defense). Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/21846.
×

Sources:

DoD. 2003. Fact sheet: Folded Arrow, version 06-30-2003. http://www.health.mil/ReferenceCenter/Fact-Sheets/2003/06/30/Folded-Arrow (accessed September 29, 2015).

DoD. 2004 (unpublished). SHAD test information. Provided to the Institute of Medicine in response to an information request submitted by Susanne Stoiber, Executive Officer, Institute of Medicine, to William Winkenwerder, Assistant Secretary of Defense for Health Affairs, Department of Defense. Washington, DC.

DTC. 1969. Test 68-71, Final report. March. Redacted excerpts from cover, pp. i, iii, iv, 1, 2, 4-6, 32, 34, number covered, 43, 44, 53, 54, 56, 57. Rpt. No. DTC 6871166R. DMMC Control #2003154-0000002. Fort Douglas, UT: Deseret Test Center.

Test 69-31

August-September 1968

Test 69-31 was carried out during daylight hours in the Pacific Ocean, roughly 80 nautical miles off the coast of San Diego, in the vicinity of San Clemente Island and Santa Catalina Island (DTC, 1969). It was the third and final test involving the USS Herbert J. Thomas, a ship that had been specially outfitted with the Shipboard Toxicological Operational Shipboard Protection System (STOPS). The 16 trials of Test 69-31 were designed to evaluate the continued effectiveness of STOPS after operational deployment.

Five trials used MAA, a simulant for sarin nerve agent, disseminated from a generator mounted on the bow of the test ship (DoD, 2002). In 11 trials, BG was disseminated from patrol boats in simulated biological warfare attacks. General quarters (GQ) was sounded before each trial began and was maintained through the completion of the sampling procedures. The final report notes, “Zone-to-zone transit within the STOPS envelope was not permitted during GQ. Following each biological trial and before securing from GQ, the ship’s water-washdown system was activated for approximately 10 minutes to thoroughly flush the topside surfaces” (DTC, 1969, p. 7).

No other decontamination procedures for the test are described in the publicly available portions of the final report.

Sources:

DoD. 2002. Fact sheet: DTC test 69-31, version 10-09-2002. http://www.health.mil/ReferenceCenter/Fact-Sheets/2002/10/09/DTC-Test-6931 (accessed September 29, 2015).

DTC. 1969. DTC test 69-31, Vol I. May 29. Redacted excerpts from pp. v, vi, 1, 3, 7. Fort Douglas, UT: Deseret Test Center.

Speckled Start (Test 68-50)

September-October 1968

The 12 trials of Speckled Start were conducted at Eniwetok Atoll, Marshall Islands. The purpose of the test was “to determine the potential casualty area and associated casualty levels for the F-4/AB45Y-4/PG2 weapon system,” which disseminated an aerosol over a 40-50 km downwind grid (DTC, 1969, p. 2). The grid encompassed a portion of the Eniwetok Atoll and an array of five Army light tugs.

Nine of the trials used the agent staphylococcal enterotoxin, Type B, produced by certain strains of the bacterium Staphylococcus aureus (DoD, 2004). A 2 percent concentration of uranine dye (sodium fluorescein) was incorporated into the agent to serve as a tracer. The trials

Suggested Citation:"Annex Brief Descriptions of SHAD Tests." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Assessing Health Outcomes Among Veterans of Project SHAD (Shipboard Hazard and Defense). Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/21846.
×

also used BG in dried form as a tracer (DTC, 1969). An F4-E aircraft assigned to the 4533rd Tactical Test Squadron, 33rd Tactical Fighter Wing, disseminated the agent and tracers for the trials. A 91-meter tower on Ursula Islet served as the primary meteorological site for recording environmental parameters and collected data to estimate the source strength and efficiency of the weapon system. The tugs were positioned in a downwind array to determine the area covered. The USS Granville S. Hall was assigned to the test to provide laboratory support.

Sources:

DoD. 2004 (unpublished). SHAD test information. Provided to the Institute of Medicine in response to an information request submitted by Susanne Stoiber, Executive Officer, Institute of Medicine, to William Winkenwerder, Assistant Secretary of Defense for Health Affairs, Department of Defense. Washington, DC.

DTC. 1969. DTC test 68-50 test report, Vol. I. March. Redacted excerpts from pp. v, vi, 1, 2, 5. Fort Douglas, UT: Deseret Test Center.

Test 69-10

May 1969

Test 69-10 consisted of trials to determine the operational effect of an attack with a persistent, toxic, chemical agent spray on US amphibious forces while they were engaged in an amphibious assault on the beaches of Vieques Island, six miles east of Puerto Rico. The test used trioctyl phosphate (TOF) (also referred to as tri(2-ethylhexl) phosphate, or TEHP) to simulate VX nerve agent (DTC, 1969).

The test sought to assess the degradation in performance of troops wearing protective clothing, the effectiveness of existing chemical weapons, and the contamination of ships and equipment supporting the landing. The first part of the test consisted of aerial spray attacks against battalion landing team (Minus) [BLT(-)] and company-sized US Marine Corps amphibious landing forces. The second part was an aerial spray attack against the USS Fort Snelling (LSD-30) while it was simulating off-loading of troops for an amphibious assault. The simulant TOF was delivered by Marine A-4 aircraft carrying Aero 14 B spray tanks.

Samples were collected from exposed personnel and their clothing to determine the extent of contamination with the simulant. The performance of the troops, landing craft crews, and ship’s crew in responding to the attack and subsequently operating in a simulated toxic environment was also evaluated.

Source:

DTC. 1969. DTC test 69-10 (U), Vol. I., Coordination draft, final report. Redacted excerpts from cover, pp. v, vi, 1-4, 1-5, 1-6. Fort Douglas, UT: Deseret Test Center.

Test 69-32

April-June 1969

Test 69-32 consisted of 27 trials carried out in the Pacific Ocean southwest of the Hawaiian Islands. It was conducted to evaluate the effect of sunlight on the viability of aerosolized Serratia marcescens and Escherichia coli disseminated in a temperate environment during sunrise and sunset periods (DTC, 1970).

Suggested Citation:"Annex Brief Descriptions of SHAD Tests." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Assessing Health Outcomes Among Veterans of Project SHAD (Shipboard Hazard and Defense). Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/21846.
×

These agents were aerosolized and released from two Aero 14B spray tanks mounted on an A4C jet aircraft. BG with 10 percent calcofluor, a fluorescent tracer suspension, was released from one tank, while either S. marcescens (14 trials) or E. coli (13 trials) was released from the other.

The five Army light tug boats were used as sampling platforms for this test. The USS Granville S. Hall provided laboratory support for the test and remained upwind of the dissemination.

Source:

DTC. 1970. DTC test 69-32, Vol. I. May. Redacted excerpts from cover, p. iii, v, 1-1 to 1-2, 2-1, 2-2. Fort Douglas, UT: Deseret Test Center.

Test 70-C

October 1969 and 1972, February-March 1973

DTC Test 70-C was conducted to characterize the naturally occurring airborne particulates in a marine atmosphere to provide background data needed for developing biological detectors (DoD, 2003). An additional objective was to assess the phosphorescent and fluorescent emission spectra of marine flora and fauna. No agents or simulants were used.

According to the DoD Fact Sheet, testing was conducted twice. In October 1972 the USNS Samuel Phillips Lee served as the sampling platform in an area 50-65 miles off the coast of San Diego. In 1973 the USNS Silas Bent collected samples as it traveled from San Diego to Rodman Naval Station, Balboa, Canal Zone.

Weekly status reports from the USS Granville S. Hall indicate that in October 1969 it was also carrying out sampling in support of test 70-C (Department of the Navy, 1969a,b).

Sources:

Department of the Navy. 1969a. Weekly status report for period ending 24 October 1969. 28 Oct.

Department of the Navy. 1969b. Weekly status report for period ending 31 October 1969. 3 Nov.

DoD. 2003. Fact sheet: DTC Test 70-C, version 6-30-2003. http://www.health.mil/ReferenceCenter/Fact-Sheets/2003/06/30/DTC-Test-70-C (accessed September 29, 2015).

Suggested Citation:"Annex Brief Descriptions of SHAD Tests." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Assessing Health Outcomes Among Veterans of Project SHAD (Shipboard Hazard and Defense). Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/21846.
×

This page intentionally left blank.

Suggested Citation:"Annex Brief Descriptions of SHAD Tests." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Assessing Health Outcomes Among Veterans of Project SHAD (Shipboard Hazard and Defense). Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/21846.
×
Page 41
Suggested Citation:"Annex Brief Descriptions of SHAD Tests." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Assessing Health Outcomes Among Veterans of Project SHAD (Shipboard Hazard and Defense). Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/21846.
×
Page 42
Suggested Citation:"Annex Brief Descriptions of SHAD Tests." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Assessing Health Outcomes Among Veterans of Project SHAD (Shipboard Hazard and Defense). Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/21846.
×
Page 43
Suggested Citation:"Annex Brief Descriptions of SHAD Tests." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Assessing Health Outcomes Among Veterans of Project SHAD (Shipboard Hazard and Defense). Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/21846.
×
Page 44
Suggested Citation:"Annex Brief Descriptions of SHAD Tests." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Assessing Health Outcomes Among Veterans of Project SHAD (Shipboard Hazard and Defense). Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/21846.
×
Page 45
Suggested Citation:"Annex Brief Descriptions of SHAD Tests." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Assessing Health Outcomes Among Veterans of Project SHAD (Shipboard Hazard and Defense). Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/21846.
×
Page 46
Suggested Citation:"Annex Brief Descriptions of SHAD Tests." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Assessing Health Outcomes Among Veterans of Project SHAD (Shipboard Hazard and Defense). Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/21846.
×
Page 47
Suggested Citation:"Annex Brief Descriptions of SHAD Tests." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Assessing Health Outcomes Among Veterans of Project SHAD (Shipboard Hazard and Defense). Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/21846.
×
Page 48
Suggested Citation:"Annex Brief Descriptions of SHAD Tests." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Assessing Health Outcomes Among Veterans of Project SHAD (Shipboard Hazard and Defense). Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/21846.
×
Page 49
Suggested Citation:"Annex Brief Descriptions of SHAD Tests." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Assessing Health Outcomes Among Veterans of Project SHAD (Shipboard Hazard and Defense). Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/21846.
×
Page 50
Suggested Citation:"Annex Brief Descriptions of SHAD Tests." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Assessing Health Outcomes Among Veterans of Project SHAD (Shipboard Hazard and Defense). Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/21846.
×
Page 51
Suggested Citation:"Annex Brief Descriptions of SHAD Tests." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Assessing Health Outcomes Among Veterans of Project SHAD (Shipboard Hazard and Defense). Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/21846.
×
Page 52
Suggested Citation:"Annex Brief Descriptions of SHAD Tests." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Assessing Health Outcomes Among Veterans of Project SHAD (Shipboard Hazard and Defense). Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/21846.
×
Page 53
Suggested Citation:"Annex Brief Descriptions of SHAD Tests." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Assessing Health Outcomes Among Veterans of Project SHAD (Shipboard Hazard and Defense). Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/21846.
×
Page 54
Suggested Citation:"Annex Brief Descriptions of SHAD Tests." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Assessing Health Outcomes Among Veterans of Project SHAD (Shipboard Hazard and Defense). Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/21846.
×
Page 55
Suggested Citation:"Annex Brief Descriptions of SHAD Tests." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Assessing Health Outcomes Among Veterans of Project SHAD (Shipboard Hazard and Defense). Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/21846.
×
Page 56
Suggested Citation:"Annex Brief Descriptions of SHAD Tests." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Assessing Health Outcomes Among Veterans of Project SHAD (Shipboard Hazard and Defense). Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/21846.
×
Page 57
Suggested Citation:"Annex Brief Descriptions of SHAD Tests." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Assessing Health Outcomes Among Veterans of Project SHAD (Shipboard Hazard and Defense). Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/21846.
×
Page 58
Next: 3 Data and Methods for the SHAD II Study »
Assessing Health Outcomes Among Veterans of Project SHAD (Shipboard Hazard and Defense) Get This Book
×
Buy Paperback | $50.00 Buy Ebook | $39.99
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

Between 1963 and 1969, the U.S. military carried out a series of tests, termed Project SHAD (Shipboard Hazard and Defense), to evaluate the vulnerabilities of U.S. Navy ships to chemical and biological warfare agents. These tests involved use of active chemical and biological agents, stimulants, tracers, and decontaminants. Approximately 5,900 military personnel, primarily from the Navy and Marine Corps, are reported to have been included in Project SHAD testing.

In the 1990s some veterans who participated in the SHAD tests expressed concerns to the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) that they were experiencing health problems that might be the result of exposures in the testing. These concerns led to a 2002 request from VA to the Institute of Medicine (IOM) to carry out an epidemiological study of the health of SHAD veterans and a comparison population of veterans who had served on similar ships or in similar units during the same time period. In response to continuing concerns, Congress in 2010 requested an additional IOM study. This second study expands on the previous IOM work by making use of additional years of follow up and some analysis of diagnostic data from Medicare and the VA health care system.

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    Switch between the Original Pages, where you can read the report as it appeared in print, and Text Pages for the web version, where you can highlight and search the text.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  9. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!