Anda di halaman 1dari 48

Editors Notes

The U.S. Army Chemical School has completed its move from Fort

McClellan, Alabama, to Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri. The Chemical School, along with the Engineer and Military Police Schools, is part of the Maneuver Support Center (MANSCEN).
For a listing of chemical components and telephone numbers, see the

Chemical Directory, page 41 of this publication. Most individuals here at Fort Leonard Wood can be reached by e-mail by typing: last name, no space, followed by first letter of first name@wood.army.mil.

I am updating my mailing list and I need feedback from you. Because of the

increasing costs of printing and the downsizing of the military, we must update our list to reflect your current needs. Therefore, if you need to be added to the mailing list or have changes in your mailing address, the number of magazines you receive, or any other pertinent information, please contact me by phone (listed on page 10) or e-mail.

As editor of the CML, I take this opportunity to thank you for your support

in the past. I ask that you continue to support your Chemical publication by submitting articles for publication.

Thank you, Mattie Kirby Editor, CML, Army Chemical Review e-mail: Kirbym@wood.army.mil

Commandant

COL Patricia L. Nilo

Managing Editor (Acting) Shirley Bridges Editor Mattie Kirby Graphics/Layout Kathie Troxell CML, Army Chemical Review is prepared twice a year by the U.S. Army Chemical School, Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri. CML presents professional information about the Chemical Corps functions related to nuclear, biological, chemical, smoke, flame field expedients, and NBC reconnaissance in combat support. Objectives of CML are to inform, motivate, increase knowledge, improve performance, and provide a forum for exchange of ideas. This publication presents professional information, but the views expressed herein are those of the authors, not the Department of Defense or its elements. The content does not necessarily reflect the official U.S. Army position and does not change or supersede any information in other U.S. Army publications. Use of news items constitutes neither affirmation of their accuracy or product endorsement. Articles may be reprinted if credit is given to CML and its authors. All photographs are official U.S. Army photos unless otherwise noted. CML reserves the right to edit material. SUBSCRIPTIONS: Available through the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC 20402-9317. POSTMASTER: Send address changes to Chemical Review, 320 Engineer Loop, Suite 210, Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri 65473-8929. By Order of the Secretary of the Army: ERIC K. SHINSEKI General, United States Army Chief of Staff Official:

PB 3-00-1
Articles

January 2000

Departments

Chief of Chemical

January 2000

Chiefs of ChemcialPast to Present

Subscription Page

Book Review

JOEL B. HUDSON Administrative Assistant to the Secretary of the Army 9922303

U.S. Army Chemical School Directory

U.S. MANSCEN Chemical Points of Contact

10 41 43 44 45
1

Regimental Command Sergeant Major

National Guard Welcomes New Members

NBCA Proactive Combat Multiplier

Extreme Cold Weather Decontamination A Chilling Scenario Reserves Conduct IDT Lanes Training the 457th experience Last Fort McClellan Soldier Arrives

The Targeting/Synchronization Process you, the chemical officer Chemical Research Unit Honored for Excellence

Training Begins

Admiral the Earl of Dundonald the conception of chemical warfare Military Support to Civil Authorities the role of the Chemical Corps Fort McClellan CDTF Ends Chemical-Agent Training at the 50,000 Milestone Whats Happening Here?

Military Masks Animals in Chemical Warfare

Depleted Uraniumthe truth and nothing but

Making History

5 7 11 16 18 20 22 26 27 30 31 35 36 37 40

2 4

Chief of Chemical

On 1 October 1999, the U.S. Army Maneuver Support Center (MANSCEN) officially activated as the combined training center for the Chemical, Military Police, and Engineer Schools. MANSCENs primary mission supports the Chemical School by developing the concepts, force structure, material requirements, and experiments that ensure the continued vitality and relevance of the corps. MANSCEN also helps train and prepare our soldiers and leaders to succeed in all future operational environments by providing Common Leader Task training. Now one of the most technologically advanced and sophisticated military training centers in the world, the new Chemical School at Fort Leonard Wood is poised to develop and field forces for the 21st century. The Chemical Corps Vision is a trained and ready force, capable of protecting the nation and its forces against all NBC threats. At Fort Leonard Wood, we will continue to train leaders, soldiers, and units to protect the joint force through innovations in doctrine, force structure, NBC defense, and smoke/obscurants. The proliferation of technology and weapons of mass destruction (WMD) throughout the world continues to increase the pace and urgency of our own innovations in NBC defense technology and training. As a capabilities-based force with a force projection-based strategy, WMD are the most serious threat to our national security. We can no longer consider CONUS-based power projection platforms as threat-free. Of the 25 nations with active NBC warfare programs, all
2

COL Patricia L. Nilo, Chief of Chemical

are pursuing delivery system technology which is key to the WMD threat. Weaponized WMD (Level I Threat), industrial releases (Level II Threat), and less sophisticated applications of NBC substances (Level III Threat) present a multitude of uncertainties that we must be prepared to defend against. In the midst of these threats, our challenge is to preserve our power projection capability and, at the same time, develop lethal and survivable forces with the capability for rapid insertion and long-term sustainability. In Chemical Vision 2010 (CV 2010), we stated that the Chemical Corps will achieve full dimensional protection through enhanced NBC situational awareness; the preservation of combat power; measures to reduce casualties while maximizing OPTEMPO; identification of threat Reconnaissance, Intelligence, Surveillance, and Target Acquisition (RISTA); and information dominance. Since the writing of that vision, we
CML

have steadfastly pursued an ambitious program of force modernization. The Joint Warning and Reporting Network (JWARN), Fox Block 2, the Multipurpose Integrated Chemical Agent Detector (MICAD), the Joint Service Lightweight Nuclear/Biological/Chemical Reconnaissance System (JSLNBCRS), and the Modular Decon System (MDS) are just a few of the new systems that have or will be coming on line soon in support of our quest to field the Chemical Corps of the 21st century. When the Army Chief of Staff, General Shinseki, directed the fielding of the Initial Brigade Combat Team (I-BCT) no later than September 2000, the Chemical Corps saw that as a prime opportunity to increase the pace of our pursuit of CV 2010s objectives. For the Chemical Corps, the I-BCT has resounding implications. Our core principles of sense, shape, shield and sustain are vital to the effectiveness of the I-BCT. This highly mobile and lethal force must have the capabilities to respond and operate in all levels of NBC threat. For example, embedded within the fighting force of this new combat brigade is a Reconnaissance, Surveillance, and Target Acquisition (RSTA) Squadron equipped with four single-platform nuclear/biological/chemical reconnaissance systems. Initially, this capability will likely be provided with a Fox-like system. Since the Fox itself does not meet the objective requirements of the I-BCT, the Chemical Corps has new impetus to speed the development and fielding of

the Chemical/Biological/Radiological Integrated Detection System (CBRIDS). Originally scheduled for fielding in 2006, this system will ultimately replace the Fox and BIDS that we know today. The CBRIDS will conduct NBC reconnaissance, survey surveillance, sampling, and warning missions with point, standoff, drop-off, and remotely piloted detectors designed to reduce operational and tactical level surprise from WMD. In addition, we are embarking on the development of a chemical reconnaissance unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) squadron known as SAFEGUARD (Scanning Airborne Emission for Gaseous Ultraspectral Analysis and Radiometric Detection). This strategic reconnaissance asset will be commanded and manned by chemical soldiers. While we have a long way to go on this particular initiative, the capabilities of this unit will allow strategic and operational commanders the ability to maximize theater OPTEMPO through the refined NBC situational awareness the SAFEGUARD system will provide. CV 2010 is still the way ahead for the Chemical Corps. As we continue to meet the demands of an ever-changing Army, we will take advantage of every opportunity to modernize our force so we can achieve full dimensional protection necessary to support our transition to the 21st century force. Dragon Soldiers!

January 2000

Regimental Command Sergeant Major


Let us not forget that the largest part of The last six months have brought many the Chemical Corps lies in our Reserves exciting changes to our Chemical Corps. and National Guard. This year most of As you know, we moved from Fort our Total Army School System (TASS) McClellan, Alabama, to Fort Leonard Wood, battalions will be coming to Fort Leonard Missouri, making the concept of the Wood for their annual training. We Maneuver Support Center (MANSCEN) a recently completed training for the stand reality. On 1 October MANSCEN was up of 10 Military Support Detachment activated, officially bringing the Chemical, (MSD) Rapid Assessment and Initial Engineer, and Military Police Schools and Detection (RAID) units here also, in our Regiments under one umbrella, yet mainefforts to support Homeland Defense taining the uniqueness of each. against Weapons of Mass Destruction Fort Leonard Wood underwent more (WMD). than 200 million dollars worth of construcOur current challenges include worktion to make this transition possible. All of ing within environmental requirements our facilities are up and running. Students, in training and building a new museum. the future of our Corps, have proven our systems. January 2000 started our first CSM James E. Van Patten III As you know our Army remains busy and we thrive on change. Like the soldiers Biological Integrated Detection Systems and personnel here at your school, you are being asked to (BIDS), Basic Noncommissioned Officer Course (BNCOC), do more each day with the same or reduced resources. and Advance Noncommissioned Officer Course (ANCOC) We continue to have challenges in manning our force classes here, completing the full spectrum of what we do at structure, especially at the sergeant/E-5 level. Our Army is the Chemical School. serving the nation in 78 countries around the world, and we The reception we received from the installation and local have chemical soldiers in many of these locations. With communities was superb. Every effort was made to ensure the General Shinsekis new guidance on how the force will reception and integration went as smoothly as possible. Fort be manned, our divisional units will soon look even better. Leonard Wood is a wonderful place to live and work. The What this will mean is yet to be realized but it could cause a opportunities here are endless, and much has been done to reduction in how Tables of Distribution and Allowances make the Chemical Corps and Military Police Corps feel (TDAs) and Echelons Above Division (EAD) are manned. at home. Recently we completed a task selection board On 31 August we had our change of command for an NBC NCO Job Aid project. This project is being ceremony where MG Ralph G. Wooten passed the regimental designed to help the junior soldiers in NBC positions at colors to COL Patricia L. Nilo. I want to take this opportunity the company/battery/troop level. Several NCOs, Mr. Mike to thank MG Wooten and his wife, Becky, for their outstanding Donohue, and I sat down for two days and went over commitment to our Corps. The Wootens have made a differall the tasks that should be included in this project. We also ence for the Corps and our Army. Not only has MG Wooten worked on adding the tips, frequently asked questions, been our leader for the last five years, he also has been a and advice that will be included. I need feedback from great friend and mentor to many of us. We wish MG Wooten the field in the following areas: training, evaluation, and Becky many happy years to come as they transition into readiness, logistics, administration, and field operations. civilian life. I am confident that COL Nilo, our new commanIf you have any tidbits, tips, advice, or frequently asked dant, will continue where MG Wooten left off and be our questions that should be included under these areas, torchbearer into the 21st century. e-mail them to me at vanpattj@wood.army.mil or As of 20 August our first active duty chemical brigade is donohuem@wood.army.mil. This is your last chance to now official. The 3d Chemical Brigade is up and running with be involved in something that will benefit everyone in the command team of COL Allan Hardy and CSM Larry Fisher. the field at the company/battery/troop level. The 82d Chemical Battalion has had all of four companies As we execute the year 2000 calendar, we will experience filled and two graduations of new soldiers. The 84th Chemical many new challenges and changes. Chemical soldiers and Battalion has already begun teaching all subjects and classes, civilians are working hard every day, upholding the customs including four Officer Basic Courses, two Chemical Captains and traditions of our Corps and working toward improving Career Courses (CCCC), and several Recon and Radiological it for the future. Thank you for what you do to maintain and courses. The 58th Transportation Battalion Advanced build the reputation of the Chemical Corps. Individual Training, our newest asset, is a part of the 3rd Chemical Brigade. ELEMENTIS REGAMUS PROELIUM Planning and preparation for our Reserve and National Guard units annual training is taking place across the nation.

CML

Making History
Chemical Schools New Commandant Makes Army History as the First Woman Chemical Commandant
By Michele Barker Reprint from Fort Leonard Woods Guidon
COL Patricia Nilo makes a point during her remarks as new Chemical School commandant.

Colonel Patricia L. Nilo made military history when she became the first woman chemical officer to head the U.S. Army Chemical School in a change of command ceremony at Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri, five months ago. Today marks a very important day in the history of the Chemical School, said Nilo, addressing the crowd at the Maneuver Support Center (MANSCEN) Plaza, 31 August 1999. We turned the page and opened a new chapter in the history of the school. This marks for us the transfer of responsibility for the school from Fort McClellan, Alabama. More than 100 service members, family members, friends, guests, and residents of Pulaski County attended the ceremony, which officially marked the opening of the Chemical School at MANSCEN. The 399th Army Band, 84th Chemical Battalion, Noncommissioned Officer Association joint service color guard, 82d Chemical Battalion, 58th Transportation Battalion, marines, airmen, and sailors all participated in the ceremony. While roughly 1,600 chemical soldiers are now assigned at Fort Leonard Wood, they bring memories of Fort McClellan with them. Although for many of us, Fort McClellan will always be special in our hearts, we are well on our way
January 2000

to transplanting the spirit and essence of the Chemical School that made McClellan that special place that it is, said Colonel Nilo in her remarks at the ceremony. We now will foster and care for that spirit and essence here at Fort Leonard Wood and allow Fort Wood to also become a special place for us. Major General Ralph Wooten, outgoing Chemical School Commandant, gave welcome remarks during the ceremony. Major General Wooten said Colonel Nilo was very knowledgeable about nuclear, biological, and chemical defense programs. She was, in fact, the unanimous choice for my successor, he said. I want you to all embrace and support Colonel Nilo in the same manner you have embraced and supported me. In a recent interview, Colonel Nilo acknowledged that she has progressed up the ranks because she was given opportunities to lead and train soldiers throughout her career. Nilo said she was excited to take on the new position. I am very humbled by the fact I was given the opportunity to do this, she said. It is an awesome responsibility. There is nothing better than training and there is nothing better than training young soldiers to be the future leaders of the corps.
5

Colonel Nilo said that for now there wouldnt be any great changes occurring at the Chemical School. There has been enough turmoil with the school moving here and with us trying to stand up again in this location, she said. Trying to keep as much normalcy as we can and keep the turbulence down to a minimum is our primary focus. I think we will grow into changes as we go on. Nilo has sought challenges throughout her military career. Before she joined the Army, she worked in a hospital laboratory. She left her laboratory position because it didnt offer career progression. She received a direct commission as a first lieutenant in the Womens Army Corps in 1974 and was detailed to the Ordnance Corps in a chemical specialty and rebranched as a Chemical Corps officer in 1977. At the time I joined the Army I was looking for something temporary and I wanted a change of pace, Nilo said. I was looking for change to broaden my experiences, to travel, to meet other people, and do other things for a short period of time. Originally, Nilo said, she hadnt decided to make the Army a career when she joined. And here I am, 25 years later, and I wouldnt have done it any other way, she said. Like her new position as the Chemical School Commandant, Nilo has held numerous command positions throughout her 25-year military career. Her commands include Headquarters and Headquarters Company, School Brigade, Ordnance and Chemical Center and School; the 278th Chemical Detachment, 1st Armored Division; Commander, 84th Chemical Battalion; and recently, Commander of Pine Bluff Arsenal, Arkansas. Over the course of her career, she has been awarded the Legion of Merit, Defense Meritorious Service Medal, and a host of other medals.

MG Ralph G. Wooten passes the flag to COL Patricia Nilo, signifying the change of command.

MG Ralph G. Wooten congratulates COL Patricia Nilo.


Michele Barker is a Department of the Army intern for Fort Leonard Woods Public Affairs. She has a bachelor of arts degree in Journalism. Barker is also a staff sergeant in the Army Reserve.

Worldwide Chemical Conference XVII d an Regimental Week Information Sheet


Dates: 19 June 2000 - 23 June 2000 Location: Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri Theme: NBC DefenseForging the Future Conference Sponsors: United States Army Chemical School and the National Defense Industrial Association (NDIA) Phone: 573-596-0131, extension 3-7352 Points of Contact: CPT Cox coxg@wood.army.mil Mr. Cockman cockmanp@wood.army.mil MSG Glitz glitzd@wood.army.mil

CML

DEPLETED URANIUM
the truth and nothing but
By Mike Sheheane Silver bullet! The unstoppable force! The immovable object! The best armor-piercing munition available! The best armor protection available! All these statements have been used to describe depleted uranium or DU. Negative statements also have been made about DU and the hazards associated with it. The following paragraphs relate what I believe every soldier should know about DU. Keep in mind, I write from a training developers perspective and not as a scientist, so readers who are sticklers for detailed data may be disappointed. Hopefully, those of you who just want the facts will get some satisfaction from what is presented here.
Background
During Operation Desert Storm U.S. military forces used DU munitions and armor in combat for the first time. The effectiveness of both the munitions and the armor were unmatched by anything available to allies or opposing forces. Figures available indicate that thousands of Iraqi tanks and other vehicles were damaged or totally destroyed by DU munitions fired from U.S. tanks, fighting vehicles, and aircraft. Not a single U.S. tank and only a half dozen fighting vehicles were lost to Iraqi fire. After the war, a government-sponsored report stated that most U.S. soldiers were not fully aware of the potential hazard associated with DU residue found on the battlefield. To rectify this deficiency, the U.S. Army Chemical School was tasked to assume the lead in developing a training program. This effort, done in coordination with the U.S. Army Ordnance Center and School, was completed in 1996, and training was implemented early in 1997. During and subsequent to the development of the DU training materials, several medical and scientific studies were conducted to analyze the effects of DU on the health of personnel wounded by or exposed to the effects of DU. After analyzing the results of these reports and studies, the 1998 Medical/ Chemical Review Conference recommended that a joint effort be initiated to revise the DU training materials to more accurately reflect health and safety hazards.
January 2000

What Soldiers Should Know


Soldiers in the field need to understand two important points that justify the use of DU: DU is the best armor-piercing material available for use in a variety of kinetic energy antiarmor munitions. This is because DU is a very dense material (one and a half times the density of lead), and it self sharpens as it penetrates. This selfsharpening characteristic makes DU better than tungsten, which mushrooms as it penetrates. Additionally, DU is pyrophoric, which means that as the penetrator self-sharpens, the small particles that flake off can ignite spontaneously in the air. The sparks produced often ignite fuel or munitions contained inside the target, giving DU rounds the capability to cause explosions without being an explosive. DU provides the best armor protection available. This is because of the density of the material. Plates of DU are sandwiched between outer and inner steel plates on heavy armor versions of the M1A1/A2 Abrams tank and provide greater protection than solid steel, alloys, or laminates, and they can defeat most currently fielded, nonDU antitank munitions. Several weapons systems use DU. The most common DU round fired by the Army is the 120mm M8297

Figure 1. The M829-series 120mm rounds come in a variety of forms. All can be fired from the M1A2 tank.

series round for the main gun of the Abrams tank. For those who appreciate minutia, the official terminology is ArmorPiercing Fin Stabilized Discarding Sabot (APFSDS), but most people call it sabot round (Figure 1). The dart-like penetrator rod is fitted with an oversized nonmetallic collar that ensures a proper fit in the gun barrel. The collar falls away as the round leaves the barrel, which allows the penetrator to travel at an extremely high velocity and retain considerable downrange energy. Older versions of the Abrams tank fire a

105mm DU round. The M2/M3 Bradley fires a 25mm round in the Bushmaster cannon. Other services also use DU rounds. The Air Force A-10 Thunderbolt uses a 30mm DU round in its main gun while the Marine AV-8 Harrier fires a 25mm round. The Navy uses DU in a 20mm round fired by the Phalanx gun system. Tests and combat action have demonstrated the value of DU as an effective enhancement to the armor of the M1-series tank (Figure 2). DU plates inserted between regular steel armor on the front of the turret can defeat most known non-DU armor-piercing munitions.

Location of DU armor

The Problem
Since DU is the best weapon and the best armor, whats the problem? DU is a slightly radioactive heavy metal. It is 40 percent less radioactive than natural uranium. DU is primarily an alpha emitter, but it also emits small amounts of beta, gamma, and X-rays. The heavy metal aspect makes it chemically toxic, like lead. Ingesting a large amount of DU residue into the body by either breathing it into the lungs or swallowing it into the digestive tract is a primary hazard. Tests show that the only time this is likely to occur is when a soldier is: (1) in or near an armored target that is struck by a DU round; (2) in or near a heavy armored
CML

M1A2 Tank
Figure 2. 8

If soldiers must remain in an area where DU is present, tank that is breached by any kind of round; (3) near a fire wear a protective mask and cover all exposed skin. involving DU munitions; or (4) frequently entering Soldiers in a confined space, such as the crew compartvehicles that have been hit by DU rounds or have DU ment of a tank, should decontaminate the area to remove armor that was breached. as much DU dust and residue as possible. The new FM Soldiers who handle bare DU penetrators found on 3-5, NBC Decontamination (to be published in second the battlefield also are exposed to significant amounts of quarter of FY00), addresses DU decontamination. As DU. (Of course, every soldier knows it is inappropriate with other decon efforts, the intent is to remove as much to handle any type of battlefield debris unless directed to of the hazard as possible. This is best accomplished by do so.) I do not discuss embedded fragments because vacuuming the vehicle with a high-efficiency particulate medical personnel treat these injuries in much the same air (HEPA) filter-equipped vacuum cleaner. Since few manner as wounds from any type of shrapnel. Studies organizations have this vacuum, FM 3-5 describes a wet of soldiers wounded by DU fragments have failed to wipe-down procedure. The residue from that decon identify any adverse health effects specifically related to procedure will contain DU, and it should be treated the radiological or chemical characteristics of DU. like any other hazardous waste: In its packaged or unfired bagged and tagged and handled in form, DU ammunition presents very Data show that DU is only accordance with the unit SOP. little hazard. Soldiers may hold an Numerous medical tests have unfired 120mm round for 940 hours a hazard in very specific been conducted and are being without exceeding the total body instances and should not conducted to assess the potential exposure limit of 5 rem per year. prevent actions to save lives health effects of DU on veterans Once fired, DU presents a greater or to continue the mission. who were exposed during the Gulf hazard, but one would have to hold War. To review this data, go to web a DU penetrator in his bare hands site (http://www.gulflink.osd.mil/ for more than 250 hours before library/randrep/du/cover.html) and access A Review exceeding the exposure limit for skin or extremities of the Scientific Literature as it Pertains to Gulf War Illof 50 rem per year. ness: Volume 7, Depleted Uranium (RAND Report). For DU to be a hazard to personal health, the body An extensive effort has been completed recently to must contain enough DU to cause radiological damage to provide updated, accurate data to all soldiers concerning the lungs or digestive tract or to cause toxic chemical the potential hazards of DU and protective measures damage to the kidneys. Protective measures should be that should be taken by those exposed to DU dust and taken to prevent exposure. There is not much a soldier residue. Data show that DU is only a hazard in very can do to prevent some exposure if his vehicle is hit by a specific instances and should not prevent actions to save DU round or his heavy armor tank is breached. Just reallives or to continue the mission. All soldiers will receive izing he is still alive probably will be the most important Tier IDU General Awareness Trainingeither during thing at the time. But, soldiers near a DU round strike or attendance at a resident school or as common task armor breach can take the following protective measures. training in their unit. This block of instruction is approximately one hour long and includes a 15-minute Protective Measures video. The new Graphic Training Aid (GTA) 3-4-1A, Depleted Uranium Awareness, supports the general Inhaling or ingesting DU in amounts experienced in awareness training and common task testing. These trainbattle does not pose an immediate health risk and must ing materials emphasize a few basic points: not prevent a soldier from saving his buddys life or from continuing the fight. Wearing an M40 protective mask is No additional protective measures are required for the easiest and most effective way to prevent inhalation unfired DU munitions or intact armor. of DU dust and residue suspended in the air or in smoke Never allow the presence of DU to interfere with from a DU munitions fire. Other types of respiratory efforts to save lives or treat the wounded. protection are being evaluated for maintenance person Never allow the presence of DU to interfere with nel who must work for extended periods inside damaged the conduct of combat operations. armored vehicles. To keep from ingesting DU residue, Do not handle DU or other battlefield debris unless soldiers must keep it out of their mouths. Cover all directed to do so. exposed skin and wear gloves to keep the DU off and Wear respiratory protection (mask), cover exposed wash hands and face after being around DU to keep it skin, and wear gloves, if you must handle or work from getting into your mouth and digestive tract. around DU dust or residue.
January 2000 9

Maintenance personnel assigned to battle-damage assessment and repair teams receive an additional block of instruction. Tier IIBattle-Damage Assessment and Repair, provides soldiers who routinely work inside the crew compartment of armored vehicles with the knowledge they need to take appropriate protective measures when required. The Ordnance Center and School is developing a DU Kit that contains a disposable HEPA filter mask for nose and mouth, disposable gloves, wet wipes for decontaminating interior surfaces, and plastic bags to collect and dispose of these items after use. Chemical soldiers receive training beyond the general awareness level. Tier IIINBC Advisor, provides the most detailed technical information of the three tiers. Every effort has been made to ensure chemical NCOs and officers know how to properly advise their unit commanders and staffs on the impact of DU on unit operations.

Depleted uranium is the best ammunition to defeat enemy armor, the best armor to protect U.S. soldiers, and does not present a health hazard when appropriate protective measures are taken. The information provided above sheds some light on the subject of depleted uranium. The controversy surrounding the use of DU probably will not disappear any time in the near future and research will continue. Based on current information, DU does not pose a militarily significant threat to soldiers who take basic measures to avoid unnecessary contact and exposure.
At the time this article was written, Mike Sheheane was serving as the Chief, Chemical Warrior Division, Warrior Department, DOTD, MANSCEN. He is a career civil servant and a retired U.S. Army Reserve officer. Sheheane is a graduate of the Army Command and General Staff College, and the Senior Training Managers Course. He holds a masters degree in both Education and Criminal Justice.

U.S. ARMY MANSCEN CHEMICAL POINTS OF CONTACT


Commercial Callers: Dial the main switchboard and when asked, dial the last five digits of the telephone number. The phone number for the switchboard is area code 573 -596-0131. DSN Callers: If the extension begins with 3, the DSN prefix is 676. If the extension begins with 6, the DSN prefix is 581. PROFESSIONAL BULLETIN DIVISION (ATZT-DT-DS-B) Army Chemical Review Editor, Ms. Mattie E. Kirby, 3-5267 Visual Information Specialist, Ms. Kathie Troxell, 3-5270 WARFIGHTER CHEMICAL DIVISION (ATZT-DT-WF-C) Chief, Erasmo Perez, 3-6266 Training Developer, Ms. Ebbie Phillips, 3-6318 Senior Training Developer, CPT Ricky Franklin, 3-6282 WARMOD CHEMICAL DIVISION (ATZT-DT-WM-C) Chief, Mr. Mark Anderson, 3-6262 Training Specialist, Mr. Melvin G. Banner, 3-6317 Training Specialist, Mr. H. Andy Bobbitt, 3-6310 Training Specialist, Mr. Billy B. Cannon, 3-6265 Training Specialist, Mr. Michael R. Robinson, 3-6316 Senior Training Systems Manager, SFC Bruce A. Baldwin, 3-6312 Senior Training Systems Manager, SFC Victor Alas, 3-6315 Instructor Writer, SFC Calvin Wilson, 3-6306 Instructor Writer, SFC Malanie English, 3-6310 Training Developer/Writer, SSG Kenneth Stafford, 3-6308 WARRIOR CHEMICAL DIVISION (ATZT-DT-WR-C) Chief, Mr. Mike Sheheane, 3-7257 Instructional Systems Specialist, Ms. Heather Gunter, 3-5083 Administrative Assistant, Mr. Grant Johnson, 3-7237 Functional Courses Branch Chief, Mr. Mike Williams, 3-7252 Instructional Systems Specialist, Mr. Marvin McFarland, 3-7210 Instructional Systems Specialist, Ms. Kim Hill, 3-7209 Training Developer/Writer, 54B, SSG Richard Vengels, 3-7171 Professional Courses Branch Chief, Mr. Van Newman, 3-7176 Instructional Systems Specialist, Ms. Paula Battle, 3-7208 Instructional Systems Specialist, Ms. Amy McCarty, 3-7230 Training Developer/Writer, SFC Anita Johnson, 3-7228 Training Developer/Writer, SGT Quincy Eskridge, 3-7174 Training Developer/Writer, SSG Matthew Griffin, 3-7207 Training Developer/Writer, SSG Angela Booth, 3-7227 STP Branch Chief, CPT Luther Morgan, 3-7203 Instructional Systems Specialist, Ms. Tina Branch, 3-7173 Instructional Systems Specialist, Mr. Mike Donohue, 3-7212 Training Specialist, Mr. E.W. Phillips, 3-7202 Training Specialist, Mr. Don Martin, 3-7201 CML

10

Military Militar y Masks Animals in Chemical arfar are Warfar e


By Major Robert D. Walk Until recently, armies used animals to succeed on the battlefield. Horses were used for transportation, dogs for protection and detection, and birds for communications. At that time, the threat to animals included pestilence and weapons of war. Because animals were essential, armies used armor and other means to protect them as much as possible.
With the introduction of chemical warfare in World War I, soldiers had to protect themselves and World War I horse mask. their animals in order to survive and fight. Horses, mules, dogs, and pigeons all required protection from held to the horses face by an elastic band. A canvas the effects of chemical warfare. frame attached to the mouthpiece held the mask away Each animal presented different challenges in protecfrom the nose so the horse couldnt suck the mask into its tion. Horses breathe through their noses, not through their nose. The carrier, a waterproof case, was strapped to the mouths, so the respirator must only cover their nostrils. bridle or halter. Horses eyes are not affected by lacrimators (tear agents), The United States issued two horse gas masks during so eye protection initially was not required. Dogs breathe World War I. One was a British mask (and the American through both their nose and mouth so their protection must copy) and the other was the American horse gas mask. cover both. Their eyes must be protected from the efThe principle difference between the two was the fects of lacrimators as well. Pigeons are so small that material used for the filter. The British mask, noted for its separate respirators are only envisioned in cartoons. high breathing resistance, was made of two layers of flanPigeon protection requires encasing the entire bird. nelette impregnated with komplexene. The breathing reGoats were used extensively to test chemical-agent sistance limited its use in horses used to move effects. Therefore, a means to protect goats also was supplies and equipment around the battlefield. The created. This article describes protection devices for carrier was a 5- by 14-inch canvas duck bag. The horses, mules, dogs, pigeons, and goats. American horse gas mask was made of multilayered cheesecloth impregnated with komplexene (six layers of Horses and Mules cheesecloth) and simplexene (eight layers of cheesecloth) and had low breathing resistance. Because the horses The horse gas mask of World War I consisted of a disliked the flavor of this mixture, oilcloth was inserted large bag that fit over the horses nose and mouth. The between the mouthpiece and the cheesecloth. The horse bit into a canvas mouthpiece and the mask was
January 2000 11

American carrier was a 10- by 14-inch burlap bag. The American Expeditionary Forces used the British horse gas mask until enough American masks were supplied. The British mask was standard throughout the war. During the war, the Fifth Avenue Uniform Company of New York City manufactured 377,881 horse gas masks of all types. Of this total, 351,270 were shipped overseas before Armistice Day. (See illustrations.) The American horse gas mask (of cheesecloth) was formally designated the MII horse gas mask in 1925. The British flannelette-type mask was designated the MI horse gas mask. These masks served the U.S. Army through the 1920s. The MII mask was (Left) American horse mask, flannelette type, open for display. further modified and became the MIII (Right) American horse mask, flannelette type. horse gas mask. The MIII was essentially an MII with a metal mouthpiece instead of a canvas one, a fitting role to ensure a good fit, and an outlet valve. The MIIIAI deleted the outlet valve. This mask served the U.S. military through the 1930s. Because the horse was vital to the U.S. military in the 1920s and 1930s, continuous tests led to mask improvements. Until the late 1930s, the design was based on the original bag over the nose type. In the late 1930s, new ideas using separate filters were tried and improved. The M4 horse gas mask adopted in 1941 represented a radical departure from previous masks. Chemical agents were no longer destroyed by chemicals on the mask material but were absorbed by two large cylindrical MI canisters carried on the horses shoulders. The M4 horse mask and goggles with plastic nonfogging lenses, airM1 canister prevented the rifle from cushion seal, leather straps. being positioned on the horses left shoulder, which meant that the M4 mask was intended for working horses. Two hoses carried air from the filters to a T-connection that The M5 and M4 horse gas masks were identical in all combined the airflow and sent it to the mask. The M4 but one aspectthe position of the canisters. On the mask was made of rubber and completely enclosed the M5, both canisters hung from the right shoulder of the mouth and nose of the animal. It included a rubber horse. On the M4, one canister hung from each shoulder. mouthpiece for the horse to bite. A mask carrier hung The M5 mask was designed for the Cavalry. The soldier from the pommel of the horse. Few of these masks were on the horse carried his rifle in the cavalry standard on manufactured until the need for horses in the Italian the horses left shoulder. In World War II, 39,159 M4 and campaign created the need to protect packhorses. M5 horse gas masks were produced.
12 CML

the aircrafts oxygen system. This allowed horses to be transported in unpressurized aircraft (usually propeller driven) at high altitudes without injuring or killing them from lack of oxygen as well as to protect them against chemical agents. The mask was adopted as the Mask, Oxygen and Protective, Horse, M6. Within the next decade, horses and their associated equipment were deleted from the now mechanized and motorized Army.

Dogs
The dog gas mask of World War I covered the dogs entire head and consisted of eight layers of chemically treated cheesecloth. It had two cellulose eye lenses to allow the dog to see, ear pockets for the ears, space for the jaws to work, and a wide neckband with straps to tie around the neck. During the war, the Bureau of Mines and the Chemical Warfare Service conducted tests and experiments on the mask. Use by U.S. armed forces was limited. Little or no experimental work was done between the wars. During World War II, military working dogs were used in the theaters of war. Several experimental M5 horse mask, stored. Both canisters of the M5 are hung from the right dog protective masks were examined. shoulder of the horse. On the M4 (photo on previous page), one canister The E12R8 and the E43R3 proved hung from each shoulder. the most successful. The facepiece of the two masks were similar except for the filter The M4 and M5 horse gas masks survived the war as attachment. The E12R8 used a filter mounted on the standard issue. Experience from flying animals over the front of the mask. The E43R3 used two Navy-civilian hump in the China-Burma-India Theater in World War mask canisters mounted on the sides. II showed that horses needed supplied air to prevent Ultimately, the E43R3 was standardized as the undue physical and nervous strain. Both horses and M6 dog gas mask. This mask used a reclaimed, coated mules needed the air to prevent damage to themselves, canvas duck muzzlepiece equipped with one large, gluedthe cargo, and aircraft. In 1950, the Chemical Corps in, slightly bulged cellulose acetate eye lens. The M6 Technical Committee determined that a suitable mask/ fitted over the face and muzzle of the dog. The outlet airline adapter was required. Horses supplied with air valve was located directly under the muzzle. It used during the flight could be used to move equipment two M12 (E40R1) filtersone filter positioned on immediately after landing. Tests showed that horses need either side of the mask under the eye lens. A three-strap 4.6 liters of air per minute at 15,000 feet and 13.7 liters harness held the mask on the dogs head. The M8 (E10R1) per minute at 30,000 feet to prevent physical stress. carrier stored the M6 when not in use. Thus, the The M6, adopted in 1951, was the final horse gas mask. mask was known as the Mask, Gas, Dog, M6-12-8. This modification of the M4 mask included During the war 1,409 were produced. a brazed-on Air Force bayonet adapter to attach to
January 2000 13

Early version of the dog mask, E12R4.

The M6 dog mask.

Military working dogs were still used during the Vietnam War. The dogs needed respiratory protection, but the M6 mask was no longer useful. Dogs procured by the armed forces could not wear the M6 mask. Even if the M6 masks were the correct size and proper fit, only 32 were available and they were in poor condition. New masks were needed. This meant either procure the M6 again (which was not acceptable, because of its small size) or design, develop, test, adopt, and procure a new mask. One requirement for a new dog detection system included respiratory protection, which eliminated the standalone dog protective mask program. The M6 dog gas mask was declared obsolete in 1969.

Pigeons
Pigeons used during World War I were protected with the same flannelette material used in the horse gas mask. Gas-proof covers (measuring 15 by 15 by 24 inches) of this material were used to cover the pigeon cages in the event of a gas attack. If no covers were available, the pigeons were released to fly above the gas cloud to escape the effects of the gas. World War I doctrine stated that pigeons could be used during a gas attack because they could quickly escape the gas. Pigeons also were used for communications during World War II. During the war, 36,000 pigeons were
14

deployed overseas. If chemical warfare were initiated, these pigeons had to be protected. Three protectors were used. The M1 pigeon protective bag was large enough to contain a small pigeon cage, and it had a hose leading to an accordion-styled air pump with a filter canister attached. The M2, measuring 65 by 22 by 14 inches, had a large acetate window on the side and held a large pigeon cage. The M3 held a smaller cage and had a window on either end. The M2 and M3 bags used a bellows attached to an M1 training filter to supply air to the pigeon. Of these masks, only the M2 survived the immediate aftermath of the war as standard issue. Pigeon cages were made a standard size in the postwar years. These new cages made the M2 pigeon protective bag impossible to use, and it was declared obsolete in 1948. The E7 Pigeon Protective Bag was designed using the standard pigeon containers PG-103/ CB, PG-105/CB, and PG-107/CB as models. During the next five years, various revisions of the basic design resulted in a lightweight, durable 12 - by 14 - by 9-inch bag with carrying straps and a tube leading to a bellows unit with an attached M11 filter canister. The handler pumped the bellows for five minutes every four hours to force clean air into the protector. The larger pigeon crates PG-49 (12 birds) and PG-50 (20 birds) required a larger protective bag. This bag, the E8, opened to 33 by 19 by 9 inches to accommodate the larger
CML

pigeon crates. Despite the unexplained nonconcurrence of the Signal Corps representative, these bags were adopted in 1951 as the M4 (former E7R2) and M5 (former E8R2). Pigeons and their associated equipment were deleted from the inventory within the next decade.

Conclusion
This article examined chemical-protective apparatus for horses, dogs, pigeons, and goats. Any animals used by the military in a chemical war must be protected to ensure their continued survival. Based on need, the U.S. military has always protected its animal workers the same as their human soldiers.

Goats
While not used extensively in war, the United States used goats to test chemical-agent effects. In 1945, the United States developed the goat gas mask. Although never formally adopted, the mask was designated the E46. It used the Army standard M10A1 filter and was stored in the E12 carrier. At least 25 were produced to use in agent testing. The goat gas mask lives in the minds of most chemical soldiers because several 1950s vintage Army training films show goats exposed to nerve agents. Tethered beside each other, one goat is protected and one is not. The cannons fire, the agent cloud rolls over the goats, and the goats are exposed to lethal concentrations of nerve agents. The unprotected goat dies horribly from the nerve agent, but the protected goat survives because of its E46 goat gas mask. The cessation of open-air testing of chemical agents using goats ended the need for this mask.

Where to find Masks


Many Army museums display horse masks the Cavalry Museum at Fort Riley, Kansas; the Quartermaster Museum at Fort Lee, Virginia; and the Chemical Museum at Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri, for example. Dog masks are rare but are displayed at the Quartermaster Museum, the Chemical Museum, and the Medical Research Institute of Chemical Defense at the Edgewood Area of Abe r d e e n Proving Ground, Maryland (not generally open to the public). A pigeon protector is at the Chemical Museum, Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri.

MAJ Robert D. Walk is currently assigned to the U.S. Army Reserve Commands DCSOPS in the Weapons of Mass Destruction Division. He is a graduate of Command and General Staff College and the U.S. Army Chemical School. He is a graduate of the University of New Hampshire with a B.S. degree in Chemical Engineering, an M.B.A. degree from Long Island University, and an M.S. degree in Civil Environmental Engineering from the University of Oklahoma. MAJ Walk can be contacted through the Chemical Doctrine Net.

Searching

I am searching for information on Company A of the 87th Chemical Mortar Battalion, which I believe was assigned to the 8th Infantry, 4th Division during the invasion of UTAH Beach. I hope to learn the following:

Company A, 87th Chemical Mortar Battalion actions and whereabouts 3-27 June
(Towns, ships, landings, or any related stories). Use and effect of 4.2 inch White Phosphorus mortar shell on the enemy. (A training manual describing the weapon and the shells in detail would be great.) Details regarding a white phosphorus explosion that wounded six men of Company A of the 87th on June 26, 1944 in or near Cherbourg. If you were with the 87th or have information on the 87th, please contact: Greg Page 7635 Torino Ct. Orlando, FL 32835 E-mail: kalpage@gdi.net

January 2000

15

the conception of chemical warfarennnn


By Burton Wright III, Ph.D. Command Historian, USACMLS
The first use of chemicals on 22 April 1915 was not an accident, but a planned operation. The idea of using chemicals for warfare first occurred to Admiral the Earl of Dundonald in 1811. He refined the idea in 1855. As a midshipman during the Napoleonic era, Dundonald spent extensive time on the Island of Sicily where sulfur mines were located. While there, he noticed the serious side effects sulfur fumes had on the people, animals, and vegetation. Also, that the area within more than two miles of the sulfur kilns was literally devoid of any type of life. He reasoned that if sulfur gas could be blown upon the enemy, they would vacate the area as those who lived near the mines did when the mines were operating. Thus, he wrote the following proposal to the government.
BRIEF PRELIMINARY OBSERVATIONS It was observed when viewing the Sulfur Kilns, in July, 1811, that the fumes which escaped in the rude process of extracting the material, though first elevated by heat, soon fell to the ground, destroying all vegetation, and endangering animal life to a great distance, and it was asserted that an ordinance existed prohibiting persons from sleeping within the distance of three miles during the melting season. An application of these facts immediately made to Military and Naval purposes, and after mature consideration, a Memorial was presented on the subject to His Royal Highness the Prince Regent on the 12th of April, 1812, who was graciously pleased to lay it before a Commission, consisting of Lord Keith, Lord Exmouth and General and Colonel Congreve (afterwards Sir William), by whom a favorable report having been given, His Royal Highness was pleased to order that secrecy should be maintained by all parties. (signed) DUNDONALD 7th August, 1855

Admiral the Earl of Dundonald

In 1855, the British and French were at war with the Russians. The war was fought entirely on the Crimean Peninsula. The Crimean War is therefore noted for its land battles. The Charge of the Light Brigade at Balaclava, the Battle of Inkerman, and the siege of Sebastopol were its principal engagements. Unlike the Battle of Inkerman, the Russians defended the Sebastopol with such tenacity and skill that Admiral Dundonald began thinking of methods to defeat them with fewer British casualties. The preparations for supporting the British Army in the Crimea were nothing short of a crime. The wounded received little or no support. The horses and other animals brought to the Crimea were forced to endure winter storms with little feed or care. Most of the horses of the Light Brigade that survived the famous Charge did not survive the winter that followed. London did not learn of these conditions until the war was over. Although the British Army fought all around the globe, the government did not have a way to replenish the army with supplies needed to exist and fight. Admiral Dundonald, having seen the carnage on shore and the heavy loss of life due to the Russian resistance and the lack of proper food and support, wanted to bring a quick end to the fighting. He knew that the redoubts the Russians had built were too strong to be stormed by infantry without suffering very heavy casualties. In fact, much of the British and French forces in the Crimean theater were involved in the siege of the fortress city of Sebastopol, and suffered heavy casualties in the process. A further memorandum written by Admiral Dundonald at the time is more specific about what needed to be done to bring the war to a conclusion with minimal casualties. The memorandum by Lord Palmerston shows the thinking of the upper levels of the British government about new ways of war.

16

CML

LORD DUNDONALDS PLAN Suppose that the Malakoff and Redan are the objects to be assailed it might be judicious merely to obscure the Redan (by smoke of coal and tar kindled in the Quarries), so that it could not annoy the Mamelon, where the sulfur fire would be placed to expel the garrison from the Malakoff, which ought to have all the cannon that can be turned towards its ramparts employed in overflowing its undefended ramparts. There is no doubt but that the fumes will envelop all the defenses from the Malakoff to the Barracks, and even to the line of battleship, the Twelve Apostles, at anchor in the harbor. The two outer batteries, on each side of the Port, ought to be smoked, sulfured, and blown down by explosion vessels and their destruction completed by a few ships of war anchored under cover of the smoke. MEMORANDUM Materials required for the expulsion of the Russians from Sebastopol: Experimental trials have shown that about five parts of coke effectually vaporized one part of sulfur. Mixtures for land service, where weight is of important, may, however, probably be suggested by Professor Faraday, as to operations on shore I have paid little attention. Four or five hundred tons of sulfur and two thousands tons of coke would be sufficient. Besides these materials, it would be necessary to have, say, as much bituminous coal, and a couple of thousands barrels of gas or other tar, for the purpose of masking fortifications to be attacked, or others that flank the assailing positions. A quantity of dry firewood, chips, shavings, straw, hay or other such combustible materials, would also be requisite quickly to kindle the fires, which ought to be kept in readiness for the first favorable and steady breeze. Crimean Peninsula

The Black Sea

Sebastopol Balaklava

LORD PALMERSTON TO LORD PANMURE HOUSE OF COMMONS, 7th August, 1855 I agree with you that if Dundonald will go out himself to superintend and direct the execution of his scheme, we ought to accept his offer and try his plan. If it succeeds, it will, as you say, save a great number of English and French lives; if it fails in his hands, we shall be exempt from blame, and if we come in for a small share of the ridicule, we can bear it, and the greater part will fall on him. You had best, therefore, make arrangement with him without delay, and with as much secrecy as the nature of things will admit of.

Admiral Dundonalds plan might have worked, but it was never implemented. The plan was published improperly in 1908 and when the Germans read it, they realized that Dundonald had proposed a gas cloud attack. Admiral Dundonalds great grandson, the 12th Earl, was instrumental in developing the Special Brigade, chemical troops trained by BG Foulkes to use chemicals in an offensive manner. However, the British failed to exploit the use of chemicals in offensive battle. The Germans seized the opportunity and were the first to use this new form of warfare recommended by Admiral Dundonald more than six decades before.

January 2000

17

Military Support to Civil Authorities


the role of the Chemical Corps
By Lieutenant Colonel Thomas Hook
ith Americas recent dominance in conventional warfare, there is an increased risk of unconventional attacks against the United States by those who are opposed to U.S. policies and actions. The U.S. military has always had a clear interest in protecting its power-projection assets located at bases and installations within the borders of the United States. However, this has become even more critical in light of continued reductions in the number of forwarddeployed units. Additionally, our increased reliance on computer-based technologies has increased the United Statesvulnerability to covert attack. Also, international and domestic terrorism continues to be potential threats to both U.S. military assets and the civilian populace. This has prompted both Congress and the Executive Branch to place greater emphasis on military support to civilian authorities. Specific areas commonly considered appropriate for military support include incidents involving information warfare (cyber-warfare), narco-terrorism, eco-terrorism, and weapons of mass destruction (WMD), as well as assistance during natural disasters. However, the Department of Defense (DoD) is a supporting agency in the federal interagency response to domestic emergencies, including those caused by terrorists use or potential use of WMD. For example, the Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI) is the statutory agent responsible for countering domestic terrorism. They are the federal lead agency for crisis management activitiesthose measures required to anticipate, prevent, and/or resolve a hostile situation. Similarly, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) is the federal lead agency for consequence management activitiesthose services and activities designed to mitigate damage, loss, hardship, or suffering resulting from man-made or natural catastrophe. In responding to incidents involving terrorists use of WMD, the Department of Defense will support the lead federal agencies (FBI or FEMA).
18

Among the challenges faced by agencies responsible for responding to these incidents is to develop an adequate definition of WMD. U.S. Code Title 50, Chapter 40, Section 2302, Defense Against Weapons of Mass Destruction, defines it as follows: The term weapon of mass destruction means any weapon or device that is intended, or has the capability, to cause death or serious bodily injury to a significant number of people through the release, dissemination, or impact of (A) toxic or poisonous chemicals or their precursors; (B) a disease organism; or (C) radiation or radioactivity. Yet another definition defines WMD as a deliberate or unintentional event involving a nuclear, chemical, radiological weapon or device, or large conventional explosive, that produces catastrophic loss of life or property. A large explosive event is also considered a WMD because initially the cause of the explosion has not been determined and the resulting damaged site may contain a radiological, biological, or chemical agent. The U.S. military provides domestic support through Military Assistance to Civil Authorities (MACA). Support to civilian agencies can take several forms. At the state level, a governor can employ National Guard (either Army National Guard or Air National Guard) forces in state active-duty status in response to natural disasters, civil disturbances, and other extreme circumstances. If an incident results in requirements that exceed the states ability to respond, the governor may request assistance from the President of the United States, who can then order the employment of federal forces such as the Army and Army Reserve. DoD assets are deployed domestically through the Department of Justice, FBI, or FEMA only when DoD assistance is explicitly requested and approved by the President.
CML

Within the Joint Forces Command (formerly USACOM), the Joint Task ForceCivil Support (JTF-CS) has responsibility for planning and executing military assistance to civilian authorities in response to WMD incidents. Where does the Chemical Corps fit into this picture? Some domestic emergencies, such as cyber-warfare, will require little or no support from chemical personnel or units. Other types of incidents, most notably WMDrelated incidents, may require extensive support from chemical personnel and units. One type of unit that may be called upon for support is the National Guard Military Support Detachments, also known as Rapid Assessment and Initial Detection (RAID) teams. There are currently 10 RAID detachments, one in each FEMA region, manned by active-duty National Guard personnel, and 44 RAID (L) detachments made up of traditional National Guard soldiers. These teams are designed to assess a suspected nuclear, biological, chemical, or radiological event in support of the local incident commander; advise civilian responders on sample and modeling results; and facilitate requests for assistance to expedite the arrival of additional state and federal assets. Although these detachments include chemical officers and 54B enlisted personnel, much of the equipment they are trained to use consists of nonstandard commercial off-the-shelf detectors and personnel protective equipment. The RAID detachments have a limited decontamination capability, so it is likely that additional support from Army, Army Reserve, and Army National Guard chemical units will be required in the event of a major WMD incident. Other available response elements include Army Reserve BIDS companies, the Armys Technical Escort Unit (TEU) and EOD detachments, the U.S. Marine Corps Chemical and Biological Incident Response Force (CBIRF), as well as response personnel from U.S. Army Medical Command (MEDCOM), the U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Disease (USAMRIID), U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Chemical Defense (USAMRICD), the Center for Health Promotion and Preventive Medicine (CHPPM), and special medical response teams from the

six Regional Medical Commands (RMC). If a WMD incident occurs in the Washington, D.C., National Capitol Region, a newly-formed National Capitol Response Force is designed to provide support to the civilian authorities. A joint DoD response capability has been created by the formation of the Chemical BiologicalRapid Response Team (CB-RRT), organized under the command and control of the U.S. Army Soldier and Biological Chemical Command (SBCCOM). The CB-RRT, composed of members of all services as well as DoD employees, has the responsibility to coordinate and manage the DoD technical response to a CB terrorist incident. The team provides the capability to aid in detection, neutralization, containment, and disposal of WMD devices. The entire spectrum of military assistance to civilian authorities will require support from logistics, engineer, NBC defense, military police, signal, airlift, maritime patrol, intelligence analysis, and other military units. The U.S. Armys Maneuver Support Center (MANSCEN) was recently activated at Fort Leonard Wood in order to coordinate training for engineer, chemical, and military police personnel and units. This coordination, together with the development of integrated MACA doctrine, will be critical to ensuring that the military can provide timely, credible support to civilian authorities in the event of a domestic emergency. With the increased risk of a WMD attack on American soil, the Chemical Corps will be an important part of that support.
At the time this article was written, LTC Thomas Hook was the Deputy Assistant Commandant (ARNG) of the U.S. Army Chemical School, Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri. He has served in numerous positions within the Chemical Corps including Platoon Leader and Operations Officer of the 69th Chemical Company, 1st Armored Division, Nurnberg, Germany; Chemical Officer, 1st AD Artillery, Company Commander of the 46th Chemical (SG) Company, 2nd Chemical Battalion, Fort Hood,Texas; Chief of Operations and Training, III Corps Chemical; NBC Threat Analyst, III Corps G-2; and Chemical Officer, 111th ASG (TXARNG), Austin, Texas. LTC Hook has also served as S3 and Executive Officer of the 249th MSB, 49th AD (TXARNG). He is a graduate of the United States Military Academy.

January 2000

19

Fort McClellan CDTF Ends Chemical-Agent Trainingat the 50,000 Milestone


By Lieutenant Colonel William Lin and Captain William J. Epolito
(Above) MG Ralph G. Wooten congratulates 2LT Troy L. Sullens, the 50,000th student to train at the Fort McClellan CDTF. (Top) Aerial view of the CDTF buildings at Fort McClellan.

If there is fear in the minds of individuals in the area, the units operational capability is degraded.
MG Ralph G. Wooten, former Commandant, U.S. Army Chemical School Fort McClellans unique Chemical Defense Training Facility (CDTF) set a major milestone in June 1999 when the 50 thousandth individual completed toxic chemical-agent training. The CDTF trains military personnel, civilians, and foreign NBC specialists in a toxic chemical-agent (VX and GB) environment to overcome their fear of operating in a chemically contaminated environment. Opened in 1987, the CDTF has served as the culmination point in training service members from all branches of the nations armed forces, from privates to generals. As the only known indoor toxic chemicalagent training center in the world, the CDTF also plays a vital role in training first responders from federal, state, and civil authorities, including law enforcement
20

officials. In addition, the CDTF has trained foreign NBC specialists from more than 29 countries. As a result of this training, individuals gain confidence in themselves, their equipment, and their procedures. For most individuals training at the CDTF, completion of toxic chemical-agent training is a graduation requirement. Just as airborne students must jump from an actual aircraft, NBC specialists must face their actual threat. Training at the CDTF is invaluable, as demonstrated during Operation Desert Storm. More than 17,000 personnel who participated in the operation went through training at the CDTF. Many say that the United States preparation for and ability to fight in a chemically contaminated environment kept Iraq from
CML

using chemical weapons against allied forces. The CDTF provides realistic and challenging training that enhances individual proficiency and confidence not only in themselves but also in their equipment. Because military members at every level, in all kinds of units, may one day be subject to a chemical attack, they must know how to survive those conditions to be able to fight and win. Truly a world-class facility, the CDTF uses state-ofthe-art technology to provide tough, realistic training while complying with local, state, and federal regulatory agencies. The multimillion-dollar CDTF opened on 2 March 1987. It features seven negative pressure training bays; a toxic-agent preparation laboratory; a technical support section to clean, service, and certify protective equipment; a wastewater treatment facility; and an Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) approved solid/liquid waste incinerator. Each of the seven bays is supported by special engineering controls and environmental monitoring equipment to ensure toxic chemical agents remain at predetermined concentration levels and that no atmospheric-agent release occurs. Another feature is its on-site nerve-agent production and storage capability, which was recently disassembled and transported to the new CDTF at Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri. The local-scale production (less than 10 kilograms per year) of nerve agent (VX and GB) is used for toxic chemical-agent training and eliminates the need to transport toxic chemical agents across the country. Unlike other U.S. Army chemical activities, where release of any toxic chemical agent is unacceptable (such as chemical munition depots), the CDTF is designed to release predetermined quantities of persistent (VX) and nonpersistent (GB Sarin) nerve agents inside the training building. No chemical agent is released into the atmosphere. Once the nerve agents are dispersed and a chemically contaminated environment is established, students equipped with full protective gear detect, identify, and decontaminate the chemical agents. Only CDTF cadre produce or handle the toxic chemical agents on site. In 12 years of operation, with more than 500,000 man-hours and 50,000 students trained, no one has been exposed to chemical agents at the CDTF, nor has the CDTF ever missed a day of training because of a chemical-agent release. Also, the CDTF has never suffered an environmental release, as recognized with the Department of the Army Pollution Prevention Award in 1994. This remarkable achievement of flawless operation is a tribute to the dedication of the military, DA civilian, and contractor personnel who operate the site.

With 2LT Troy L. Sullens is MG (R) Gerald G. Watson, the first student to go through the Fort McClellan CDTF. MG (R) Watson was the Fort McClellan Post Commander and Chief of Chemical at the time he attended CDTF.

The CDTF is subject to verification inspections by the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) in accordance with the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC) Treaty. The CDTF has successfully completed two inspections (in October 1997 and November 1998) with no findings, which further demonstrates its ability to operate safely and effectively. With the closure of Fort McClellan, the CDTF moved to its new facility at Fort Leonard Wood. The Fort McClellan CDTF transferred to the Department of Justice on 20 August 1999. The Department of Justice will rename the facility COBRA-TF (Chemical, Ordnance, Biological, and Radiological Training Facility), and use it to train personnel attending the Center for Domestic Preparedness classes. The facility will train first responders throughout the country and eventually throughout the world. Even with ongoing efforts to deter and prohibit the use of chemical and biological weapons, intelligence experts indicate that the prospect of facing an NBC threat in the future is likely. Trained and ready units that are challenged with realistic NBC training are important to our countrys ability to protect our freedom and way of life. The CDTF meets the need for realistic toxic chemical-agent training in detection, identification, and decontamination, and it will keep Americas armed forces trained and ready for the 21st century. Weve Got the Nerve
At the time this article was written, LTC William Lin was the Director, Chemical Defense Training Facility, and CPT William J. Epolito was the Operations Officer, Chemical Defense Training Facility at Fort McClellan, Alabama.

January 2000

21

Whats happening here?


A quick look inside the new CDTF.

The CDTF compound consists of a guard house, an administration building, and the training building. This view of the training building is from the outside training pads within the compound.

By Kathryn Troxell, CML Visual Information Specialist Photos by Jim Ray, TSC photographer

During the last week of July 1999, TRADOC video teams followed a group of trainees through the new CDTF as they simulated the training that is now in full swing. The video they made, Welcome to the Chemical Defense Training Facility (TVT 3-118, PIN 711265), is available through your installation Training Support Center.
On 26 August 1999, TRADOC authorized the start of toxic chemical operations at the new CDTF at Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri. The CDTF, a key component of the U.S. Army Chemical School, conducts realistic and doctrinally accurate chemical defense training (detection, identification, and decontamination) for attending U.S. and allied military personnel as well as U.S. government agencies upon request. The CDTF is the only toxic chemical-agent training facility in the Department of Defense.

are

SFC Lamar Garrett instructs students on the proper way to roll the hood of the mask.

Student training is a two-day process beginning with classroom orientation and safety and first-aid lectures. Following the lectures, the cadre break the class into even groups of up to ten students, then assigns each student a buddy. Students undergo medical screening and respiratory reaction and protective assessment testing system evaluations. Upon

Buddies check that collars and cuffs are tightly buckled into place, ensuring protection.

22

CML

Testing with stannic chloride smoke is the final check for proper fit of the mask.

Agent is applied to a vehicle inside a training bay. Students must identify the agent prior to decontaminating the vehicle.

completion of the medical screening and respiratory evaluation, students receive personal protective equipment (PPE). Additionally, students receive government issued undergarments. Students may not wear any personal clothing or jewelry inside the toxic-agent training bays. After issue of PPE, students move to outdoor training pads and conduct a series of scenario-driven training events under simulated-agent conditions. The students rehearse all NBC defense skills they will use inside the toxic-agent training bays. Skills include use of various chemical agent detection, identification, and decontamination equipment. Additionally, students rehearse removal of PPE in a simulated doff area. Completion of the outdoor simulation training concludes the first day of training at the CDTF. On the second day of training, students redress in their PPE. After inspections by cadre personnel, the students move through a mask-check chamber before entering the toxic-agent training area. In the mask-check chamber, students undergo a series of exercises under the acrylic hoods filled with either stannic chloride or isoamyl acetate. If the student does not detect any odor, the mask is properly fitted. The students then proceed into one of the eight environmentally controlled training bays. After agent handlers place nerve agents GB (or Sarin) and VX on various training devices, students must detect,
23

Students use M8 paper to check for the type of chemical agent the vehicle was exposed to. The paper is treated with reagents that respond to the presence of particular chemical agents. Light stripes on the soldiers sleeves are M9 tape, which indicates if the individual has been contaminated. January 2000

(Left) Students, working in pairs, learn to decon a vehicle on an outdoor training pad. The M13 DAP holds 14 liters of decontaminating agent number 2 (DS2). During decon, students wear toxicological agents protective (TAP) overalls over their MOPP4 ensemble. (Below) SFC Garrett instructs students in the use of the Chemical Agent Monitor (CAM) prior to the indoor portion of their training.

(Below) Immediate first aid is essential in a contaminated environment. A student administers a nerve-agent antidote kit (NAAK) to a simulated casualty (a mannequin).

identify, and completely decontaminate the agent using equipment available to them in the field. At the end of the training day, buddies assist each other in step-by-step doffing of exterior contaminated garments. Gear and garments are placed in storage receptacles for complete decontamination. Battle dress overgarments are used and decontaminated four times before being destroyed. Students use shower facilities in the mens and womens locker rooms before redressing in personal uniforms. An out-briefing and discussion of lessons learned completes the two-day training tour. Special thanks to MSG William Gunter and SFC Lamar Garrett of the CDTF, the TSC photo lab, and the students and instructors who participated in this training simulation.

24

CML

(Below) Training scenarios involve several different situations and vehicles for students to test and decontaminate. A student prepares to check a helicopter and its pilot for contamination.

(Above) Students train in a toxic chemical-agent environment in eight specially designed indoor training bays. Students wear PPE.

(Left) After a day of training, personal decon begins. Buddies help each other decon masks and doff their gear before showering. All PPE that was used in the training is decontaminated, then certified for future training. PPE that cannot be certified is destroyed through incineration.

January 2000

25

First Student Undergoes Training at New Fort Leonard Wood CDTF


By Major George D. Heib and Captain William J. Epolito

Training Begins

On 21 September 1999, four and one half years after the Base Realignment and Closure commissions decision to relocate the U.S. Army Chemical School to Fort Leonard Wood, the new Chemical Defense Training Facility (CDTF) staff trained its first student, Army Specialist Patrick Carder. Specialist Carder is a 54B assigned to HHC, 84th Chemical Battalion. He was part of a group of Chemical School and Fort Leonard Wood senior leaders led by the Chemical School Commandant, Colonel Patricia Nilo, to verify the safe conditions and procedures of the facility. The group, which consisted of senior officers, civilians, and NCOs from the Army, Air Force, Navy, and Marine Corps, conducted a one-day basic skills scenario that included detection, identification, and decontamination of toxic chemical nerve agents, GB and VX. According to one senior leader who participated in the toxic-agent training, Colonel Richard Hobbs, Commander of the Marine Corps Training Detachment, Fort Leonard Wood, I just wanted to make sure our marines receive safe and realistic training. With the establishment of the U.S. Army Chemical School at Fort Leonard Wood, the new CDTF continues the mission of training U.S. and allied military personnel as well as select DoD civilians in a toxic chemical-agent environment. This training enables these NBC defense specialists to overcome the fear of operating in a chemically contaminated environment and gives them confidence in themselves, their equipment, and their procedures. The training was a success, according to the leaders who attended. Additionally, several Missouri news media and print journalists captured the training and reported favorably on the operations and facility safety systems. As for Army Chemical Specialist Carder, the first student and veteran of Fort McClellan toxic-agent training, The training was just like another day at the office. The new CDTF is larger and includes several advances in technology. Also, the new design incorporates improvements based on lessons learned from 12 years of operation at Fort McClellan. The new facility is similar to the previous CDTF except for elimination of the incinerator. A certified waste contractor will remove all solid and liquid wastes for disposal off-site. The facility completed its initial OPCW inspection in accordance with the CWC Treaty and conducted its first toxic chemical-agent training class on 4 October 1999.

Colonel Patricia Nilo, Commandant, USACMLS, presents a CDTF Training Certificate to Specialist Patrick Carder.

The new CDTF at Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri.

No turning backSenior leaders prepare to enter the toxic chemical environment in MOPP4.
At the time this article was written, MAJ George D. Heib was serving as the first Director of the new CDTF at Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri. After successfully completion of the transfer of the Fort McClellan CDTF to DoJ, CPT William J. Epolito transferred to Fort Leonard Wood to continue serving as the Operations Officer, CDTF.

26

CML

A chemical officer must stress to his chain of command the importance of being an active participant. He must be able to articulate what the chemical officer brings to the process from his unique perspective.

The Targeting/Synchronization Process you, the chemical officer


By Lieutenant Colonel Chuck McArthur
FM 6-20-10, Tactics, Techniques, and Procedures for the Targeting Process, covers actions required in the targeting process. At the Joint Readiness Training Center (JRTC), we noticed that units conducting the targeting process as a stand-alone process did not have maneuver and battlefield operating systems (BOSs) representation in the targeting meeting. Thus, targets often did not support the scheme of maneuver. We also noticed that some coordination took place at the targeting meetings without input from key players. This observation led to the development of the targeting and synchronization meeting. The targeting and synchronization process focuses on massing the combined combat power of the brigade and battalions at a decisive point and time. When well executed, this process allows brigade and battalions to direct lethal and nonlethal fires and ensures that all the BOSs are integrated and synchronized. During the normal military decisionmaking process, the battle staff develops an operations order based on a snapshot in time that reflects the S2s analysis of the enemys most probable course of action. As the order and the initiation of combat operations continue to develop, the battlefield framework starts to mature and develop. When updated information on enemy locations, compositions, and the friendly situation is received, a mechanism must be in place to incorporate changes. This can be accomplished during the targeting and synchronization meetings, which must become a regular part of the brigades and battalions normal battle rhythm. The methodology utilized throughout the targeting and synchronization process is simple: decide, detect, deliver, and access (D3A). The targeting and synchronization meeting allows the battle staff to focus on 24-, 48-, and 72-hour time periods and provides direction and resynchronization of brigade and battalion operations. By understanding the time periods the staff will address in the meeting, the chemical officer can allocate time to plan, coordinate, integrate, and synchronize the actions of chemical assets with those of other units and actions on the battlefield.

A brigade rehearsal prior to a combined-arms attack helps participating units coordinate and synchronize their missions.

Battalion Commander or Executive Officer S3 S2 Fire Support Officer Air Liaison Officer Supporting Arms Liaison Team Officer Chemical Officer Engineer Officer Civil Affairs Officer Air Defense Artillery Officer The battalion executive officer may add others. Because of the nature of the fight portrayed at the Joint Readiness Training Center, initially there may be no NBC threat. In this case, chemical assets may Preparation for an attack at Shuggart-Gordon MOUT site at Fort Polk JRTC. conduct other operations, such as conChemical assets often execute missions that are voy escort, security operations, or other missions assigned not in synch with the remainder of the brigade and/or to support the ground tactical plan. Once the situation battalions. This happens mainly because the chemical changes, it is difficult for the chemical officer to officer does not participate in the targeting and synchrochange the mission profiles for NBC assets. nization meeting or, even worse, does not understand the process. Normally, the targeting and synchronization Since the entire brigade/battalion battle staffs attend process meeting is chaired by the brigade/battalion the targeting and synchronization process meetings, this executive officer. He and the fuel support officer (FSO) is the ideal place to integrate changes. A key product defacilitate the meeting. The executive officer must ensure veloped at these meetings is a brigade/battalion all BOS elements are integrated during the meeting. fragmentary order. This order is important because it allows the chemical officer to redirect the utilization of A chemical officer must stress to his chain of chemical assets that are committed elsewhere. command the importance of being an active participant. He must be able to articulate what the chemical No NBC doctrine currently describes how to integrate officer brings to the process from his unique perspective. data into the targeting and synchronization process. ChemiI recommend that attendees for this meeting include: cal officers must understand that if they are not an active participant in the process, they are operating outside the Brigade brigade/battalion staffs decision-making cycle. Furthermore, they will be unable to maintain a constantly Executive Officer Air and Naval Gunfire Liaison updated state of situational awareness regarding the S3 Company (if available) enemy and future friendly operations. Chemical officers S2 Brigade Engineer must be actively involved in the process in order to fight Fire Support S5 a proactive chemical fight, not a reactive one. Coordinator S3 Air Aviation Liaison Officer Fire Support Officer The chemical officer must prepare before attending Targeting Officer Management Information a targeting and synchronization meeting. Bring all the Psychological Control Officer Commander materials needed to participate and support your posiOperations Rep Direct Support Field Artillery tion. Understand that much coordination goes on in a Air Liaison Officer Officer targeting and synchronization meeting, but dont wait Air Defense Artillery Chemical Officer until the meeting to begin your initial coordination. Staff Judge Advocate Officer (ADAO) Military Police Battlefield Information Prior to the meeting, meet with the S3 or FSO to verify Representative Coordination Center Rep the time periods that will be addressed in the meeting. Assistant S3 Additionally, coordinate with the S2 before the meeting. The brigade executive officer may add others.

In the past, the United States has repeatedly become complacent after a conflict. We must never become so content that we dont attempt to improve ourselves and our units.
This will help you understand the enemys capabilities and intentions. You and the S2 must present the same analysis of the enemy to the staff and commander. If there is a conflict, the commander many times is forced to take the word of the S2 since the battle is built around the S2s analysis of the way the enemy will fight. Remember that intelligence drives maneuver. Additional information that will aid your preparation: Changes to the commanders intent. Upcoming changes to task organization. FRAGOs from higher headquarters. Current CBT PWR. Status of subordinate elements. Planned operations. Maneuver assets available. As a minimum, the chemical officer must bring the following information to the meeting: Current brigade MOPP status (all elements in brigade including such attachments as Marine and Air Force units). Latest NBC intelligence from division. Current NBC template reflecting the chemical named areas of interest (chemical R&S plan) that you have coordinated with the S2 and your 24- to 72-hour outlook (be able to address possible enemy actions). Current NBC assets task organization. Current locations of NBC assets. Current consolidated list of decontamination sites (selected and proposed). Locations of CDE and status of resupply. Changes to commanders NBC intent. Estimate of potential enemy delivery assets (gathered from sources such as the S2, FSO, and ADAO). Smoke matrix and the status of all smoke in the units.

This article is not intended to be the schoolhouse or JRTCs answer to solve the chemical officers woes in the targeting and synchronization process. No written manual or article can take the place of genuine concern for your BOS in this profession of arms. No test can be given to evaluate proficiency. The true test will come in times of crisis or conflict. A final note. In the past, the United States has repeatedly become complacent after a conflict. We must never become so content that we dont attempt to improve ourselves and our units. Understanding the targeting and synchronization process will truly aid you in your efforts as a staff officer to attain integration and synchronization of your assets during operations, thus increasing your units chances of success in an NBC environment.

At the time this article was written, LTC Chuck McArthur was the Chief of the Warfighter and Warmod Departments, U.S. Army Maneuver Support Center, Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri. His previous assignments include, Senior Chemical Observer-Controller at the Joint Readiness Training Center, Fort Polk, Louisiana; Battalion Executive Officer, 2d Forward Support Battalion, Camp Hovey, Korea; Deputy Division Chemical Officer, 2d Infantry Division, Korea; and Chief, Combined Arms and Tactics Branch, U.S. Army Chemical School, Fort McClellan, Alabama. He is a graduate of the Command and General Staff College at Fort Leavenworth, Kansas. LTC McArthur holds a BS degree in political science from North Carolina A&T State University.

Annual Reunion for the 86th Chemical Mortart Battalion


15 through 18 March 2000 on Jekyll Island, Georgia For additional information contact: Mr. George Murphy 818 West 62nd Street Anniston, AL 36206

Chemical Research Unit Honored for Excellence


By Cindy Kronman, Writer/Editor, Research Operations Division, USAMRICD (Reprint from The Mercury, U.S. Army Medical Department Publication)
The U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Chemical Defense (USAMRICD) has won the 1999 Army Research and Development Organization Award of Excellence in the small laboratory category. This is the second time in the past three years that the institute has received honors in the Armys R&D Organization of the Year competition. I am extremely proud and honored that the institute has been recognized in this manner, said USAMRICD commander COL James Little. We have an exceptional organization with devoted individuals working together on an extremely important mission. I really appreciate all those individuals who worked so hard to deserve this recognition. MG John S. Parker, commanding general of USAMRICDs higher headquarters, Medical Research and Materiel Command, also commended the institute upon its success. The Institute of Chemical Defense is a national asset. This recognition as a laboratory of excellence firmly establishes the fact that the laboratory management, science, and products that are generated are world class. The scientists, engineers and administrative support personnel, through this award, have been recognized as a premier team. My congratulations to each and every one of them, Parker said. The awards recognize the best R&D organizations, those that enhance the capability and readiness of the Army operational forces and the national defense and welfare of the United States. An evaluation committee composed of highly qualified members of the Army and the Department of Defense science and technology community, and chaired by the assistant secretary of the Army for acquisition, logistics, and technology, judges a written nomination as well as an oral presentation provided by the organizations commander or director. The organizations were ranked according to accomplishments and impact, organizational vision, strategy and plan, resource allocation, and continuous improvement.
30

USAMRICDs nomination packet noted research accomplishments toward providing the warfighter with medical countermeasures to chemical warfare agents (CWAs), including: Development of an advanced anticonvulsant that prevents the brain damage and behavioral incapacitation that occurs following exposure to nerve agents has progressed to the concept exploration phase. A prototype reactive topical skin protectant that acts both as a barrier and a decontaminant was demonstrated to provide protection for up to 60 minutes from both the blister agent mustard and the nerve agent soman. The institutes bioscavenger program contributed to the development of a reusable decontaminating sponge and human mutant enzymes that can hydrolyze CWAs. USAMRICD scientists also developed research strategies to address previously identified major mechanisms of action of sulfur mustard. They demonstrated that both anti-inflammatory drugs and protease inhibitors can protect animal models against sulfur mustard-induced edema, erythema, and microvesication. Other research on vesicants demonstrated considerable protection of the cornea following pharmacological intervention and accelerated wound healing following debridement with a carbon dioxide laser. Another area of recognized excellence was training in the medical management of chemical casualties and support to U.S. agencies that oversee counterterrorism preparedness. Since 1984, USAMRICD has trained more than 17,000 health-care providers. In 1998, the institute prepared for its largest training endeavora live threeday satellite broadcast of Medical Response to Chemical Warfare and Terrorism. Shown worldwide in April 1999, this satellite broadcast resulted in the training of 40,000 and the familiarization of approximately 2.5 million people.
CML

Below zero temperatures are too cold for most decontaminants to react effectively with chemical agents . . . Chemical agents become two to five times more efficient in the cold . . . The U.S. military is not prepared to meet this challenge.

Extreme Cold Weather Decontamination A Chilling Scenario


By Captain Ian A. McCulloh
2LT Jones had never been more frightened and nervous in his life. It was an incredibly cold New Years Day and he had not quite recovered from his hangover from the night before. Now sitting in his HMMWV, the young chemical platoon leader could scarcely recall being awakened in the middle of the night by his commander. North Korea had begun its offensive. Reports of chemical contamination flooded the headquarters. Jones knew his platoon was the best-trained platoon in the company. They had spent twice as much time in the field as any other platoon. He still worried about operations in real contamination and it was so cold, -6 degrees Fahrenheit (F). They never used water in their training when it was cold because they were afraid of breaking the equipment. Youre overreacting, he thought to himself. The agents will freeze in this weather. I cant believe the Koreans even used them. The platoon arrived at the decon site on schedule and Jones was surprised at how fast his platoon was able to set up the decon site. The detailed equipment decon was going well; it was textbook. About five hours after the first vehicle completed the decon, the reports reached 2LT Jones 13 dead; 11 unconscious; 21 experiencing vomiting, dizziness, and confusion. SSG Williams came running towards him, Sir, we have four casualties. How? demanded the platoon leader. Im not sure. It was the guys on the detailed equipment decon in the warm-up tent. The M8 didnt go off. Neither did the M21. Smith started pukin All right. Get everyone to keep their masks on, ordered Jones. 2LT Jones and his platoon sergeant talked at length, but couldnt determine the cause of the growing number of casualties. The vehicles and personnel arent getting clean, cried Jones. That cant be it, replied SFC Thomas. Theyre doing a great job scrubbin DS2 down there, and the CAM is reading clean. SSG Williams put two extra CAMs at station 5 just to be sure. The casualty reports continued to rise. Three days later, 157 dead, more than 2,000 casualties, including 2LT Jones and his platoon. The Eighth Army was unable to decontaminate themselves because of the extreme cold weather.
January 2000 31

Below zero temperatures are too cold for most decontaminants to react effectively with chemical agents. It is also too cold for detection equipment to properly detect contamination. Most chemical agents pose a threat in temperatures as low as -50 degrees F or lower. Contrary to popular belief, chemical agents become two to five times more efficient in the cold. North Korea is only one of many countries that has the ability to employ chemical weapons in an extreme cold weather environment. Many agents do not freeze; they increase in effectiveness in extreme cold weather. The U.S. military is not prepared to meet this challenge. This article identifies necessary precautions for conducting extreme cold weather decon and describes two techniques for detailed equipment decon.

THREAT
Operations in extreme cold weather will happen. During the winter months, 45 percent of the North American landmass and 65 percent of the Eurasian landmass are characterized by extreme cold and deep snow. These areas include Korea, China, Bosnia, Kosovo, Russia, Ukraine, Kazakhstan, and the United States. The former Soviet Union developed procedures to weaponize a series of agents to be effective in extreme cold weather. One V-series nerve agent, VR55, does not have a known freezing point. In temperatures from -20 degrees F to -40 degrees F, agents such as GB become like thickened GD and GD becomes like VX. Choking agents have increased persistency from 0 degrees F to 40 degrees F. Even AC, which solidifies at 14 degrees F, can be disseminated as fine particles, thereby increasing its effective time and threat. Mustard agents employed through pyrotechnic devices create effective vapor hazards far below the freezing point of mustard. Numerous tests in Alaska, Norway, and the Soviet Union indicate that chemicals pose an increased threat in extreme cold weather.

LACK OF DOCTRINE
Current U.S. doctrine does not adequately address decontamination in extreme cold weather. This article addresses four areas: Decontaminants. The majority of decontaminants have reduced effectiveness at temperatures below 0 degrees F and are useless below 20 degrees F. In a real-world situation this condition will be worse because of impurities in agents and decontaminants. Dr. Kirkwood, Deputy Director of Combat Developments, U.S. Army Chemical School, tells of an experiment where he mixed dry STB in a puddle of
32

mustard at 10 degrees F. Mixing STB and mustard normally produces a highly exothermic reaction (explosion), but in this case there was no reaction. It was too cold. FM 3-9, Potential Military Chemical/ Biological Agents and Compounds, states that mustard freezes at 60 degrees F, so it is apparent that agents can remain toxic at temperatures far below their freezing point. While FM 3-5, NBC Decontamination, states that STB is an effective decontaminant down to 0 degrees F, this is not the case. Detection. Present detection technology is not effective in cold temperatures. An agent must be in liquid or vapor form and in significant quantities for present equipment to detect it. Mustard agents frozen beneath a layer of ice are in a solid state, so readings would indicate the area is clear of contamination. Relying on that reading, a soldier might erect a tent and go to sleep. A slow, steady vapor could then off-gas near the sleeping soldier, making him a casualty. Because the vapor would dissipate in the cold, the detection equipment would not indicate any contamination. Transfer Hazard. FM 3-4, NBC Protection, and FM 3-5 indicate that tracking frozen contamination into a warmed area is a well-known hazard. Tests in Alaska show that agents mixed with frozen water adhere to protective clothing, making their removal improbable. When these agents are tracked into warmer areas such as tactical operations centers, buildings, or heated vehicles, the change in vapor pressure creates a hazard. A change in vapor pressure also can occur as temperatures increase from night to day. This danger is magnified by the limitations of current detection technology. Cold Weather Injuries. The risk of cold weather injury increases significantly when soldiers spray water or get wet in cold weather. Due to the risk of contamination, it is not easy for soldiers to keep warm. If they sit in a warm vehicle or tent, they most likely will spread contamination into that area.

IMPROVEMENTS
This section identifies two techniques used to conduct extreme cold weather deconHeated Area Decon and Outside Decon. These techniques were reviewed and staffed by numerous field-grade officers and NCOs with experience in extreme cold weather conditions. They were tested at Fort Drum, New York, in March 1999, when the 59th Chemical Company conducted decon operations for 21 days in subzero temperatures. The lows reached -21degrees F, and the average temperature was -15 degrees F.
CML

Follow the protection guidelines in FM 3-4, NBC


Protection, Appendix A. Units in Alaska created these guidelines in the early 1980s. The 59th Chemical Company at Fort Drum, NY, also uses them. Conduct detailed troop decontamination in a warm area to prevent cold weather injuries. Use a GP medium tent with a heater. Provide warming tents for contaminated soldiers. Cold weather injuries can occur even when wearing MOPP4. Erect contaminated warming tents where MOPP4 must be worn. Erect separate warming tents for chemical personnel running the decon site, who may not be contaminated but must remain in MOPP4. Separate warming tents limit the spread of contamination, and reduce the risk of cold weather injuries. Place M8 or M22 chemical-agent alarms in all warming tents. In most cases the alarms will not detect outside agents. The battery life will be very short. Alarms placed in warming tents can effectively detect any vapor hazard resulting from entering a warmed area. Store empty tank and pump units that are drained of all water. Most decon sites will require water. In extreme cold, however, the water can freeze, causing hoses and pumps to crack and break. In most situations, water will not freeze while the vehicle is in motion. The hazard comes when the vehicle sits full of water for several hours or after the tanks have been emptied but water remains in hoses and the pump. The 25th Chemical Company in Germany avoids this problem by disassembling the hoses on the tank and pump units and draining them. Planners must realize that this technique makes resupply operations more time consuming. Minimize digging because it increases the risk of vapor hazards. Contaminants may be trapped in frozen layers below the surface. When soldiers dig, the layer becomes exposed to the surface, where the temperature creates a different vapor pressure. The change in vapor pressure creates a new vapor hazard. Check a core snow sample when entering a new assembly area. Contaminants often become occluded in snow and ice. This makes detection more difficult and increases the spread of contamination. Snow may drift for miles. Contaminants also may be trapped in a layer beneath the surface. NBC recon teams should take samples of snow from several layers by digging in a few areas. Test the snow with M8 or M9 paper. If possible, warm the snow to a liquid and test it with a chemical agent monitor (CAM). Spray the snow surface with water. This creates a thin layer of ice over the snow. The ice reduces the spread of contamination by preventing agents that are occluded in the snow from drifting.
January 2000

Several points apply to both techniques:

TECHNIQUE 1: DECON IN AN ARTIFICIALLY HEATED AREA A soldier faces two major problems when conducting decon in extreme cold weatherthe reaction between agent and decontaminant, and the ability to check for contamination. To overcome these problems, move the tasks to a warm area. The 59th Chemical Company used a maintenance frame tent with heaters. Using a preexisting building for the heated area is another option. Whatever the structure, ensure it is large enough to contain a detailed equipment decon. It must also have the ability to be heated. Three concerns must be addressed: Sites must allow for contaminated drainage. Establish a series of trenches and sumps or use 65-gallons per minute (GPM) pumps. Masks can easily fog up when soldiers move from a cold environment to a heated one. Purchase antifog commercially to issue to soldiers. A field-expedient method is to spit in the inside of the eyepiece and rub it with bare fingertips until a squeaking sound is heard. The final concern is carbon monoxide poisoning. Ventilate the heated area and turn off the vehicles engines while waiting at each station. The maintenance frame tent has a ventilation system.

ADVANTAGES Nearly eliminates the risk of cold weather injuries,


depending on how warm the area is. The only significant risk occurs when soldiers leave the heated area. Consumes less antifreeze. Some antifreeze is used in equipment that leaves the heated area, such as tank and pump units or M17s. Reduces the risk of equipment breakage due to cold temperatures. Makes decontaminants effective. Allows detection equipment to identify any residual hazard. Makes decon by removal possible. DISADVANTAGES This technique has several advantages. It

Heated area may create a new vapor hazard. The


exhaust system may spread the new vapor hazard in the area of operation. This vapor hazard can become persistent in extreme cold weather. Erecting a maintenance frame tent is labor intensive, unless an existing structure is available. Once decon is complete, the unit no longer can use the structure or tent. Fogging may occur on glass surfaces.
33

There are a few disadvantages:

TECHNIQUE 2: OUTSIDE DECON


In some circumstances a tent or structure may not be available. The unit may not want to spend the time and resources to use the first technique if the temperature is between 0 and 40 degrees F. If a unit must conduct decon outside in extreme cold weather, do the following: Use an additional decontamination apparatus at each water blivet just to heat water. This is the best way to prevent the water from freezing. It is more environmentally safe than using antifreeze in the water. Redirect spray wands back into the water blivet when not in use. This technique helps heat the water and, more importantly, it prevents water in the wand from freezing and breaking it. Use antifreeze in the decontamination apparatus IAW the TM. Cycle antifreeze through all pumps after use to prevent damage. Use 65GPM pumps to reduce contaminated drainage on the site.

DISADVANTAGES Equipment breaks in extreme cold weather. Depending on the temperature, it may be too cold for a
chemical reaction to occur at station 2 or for chemical detection to be effective at station 5. Increased risk of off-gassing, if the temperature rises after the decon is complete. Difficult to decon by removal. Requires larger quantities of antifreeze and fuel to run the additional decontamination apparatuses used to heat water. This technique has several disadvantages:

CONCLUSION
Conducting decontamination operations in extreme cold weather is a real threat and, unfortunately, is probably one of our greatest NBC defense weaknesses. The chemical community must stop disregarding this threat. Only through proper doctrine and training will our chemical units be able to meet this challenge.
At the time this article was written, CPT McCulloh was the Commander of the 1st Special Forces Group Chemical Detachment at Fort Lewis,Washington. His previous assignments include Executive Officer, 59th Chemical Company, a dualpurpose Chemical Platoon Leader, and Squadron Chemical Officer for 3-17 Cavalry all at Fort Drum, New York.

ADVANTAGES
The principal advantage of this technique is avoidance. The agents remain in their cold state, reducing the risk of vapor hazard. It is less labor intensive to set up a decon site outside than to erect a huge maintenance frame tent, which may take a day to complete.

Wanted! Wanted! Wanted!


Do you have a story youd like to share with our readers? Or do you have an idea on how to improve a technique or piece of equipment? If so, send your article to us and well do the rest. Articles can be any length. Include any photos or graphics you feel will add to the article. Article may be sent by paper copy, on disc (in Microsoft Word), or e-mail (kirbym@wood.army.mil). Hard-copy photos are preferred. Digital photos are acceptable if saved at a dpi/ppi of 200 or more and at 100 percent of actual size. TIFF and JPEG file formats are preferred. Be sure to include a brief biography about yourself.

Our phone number is (573) 596-0131, extension 3-5267. Mattie Kirby, editor

34

CML

Reserves Conduct IDT Lanes Training the 457th experience


By Captain John Garnsey
Chemical lanes training is typically a collective exercise directed at the platoon and company levels. Evaluator chemical teams from U.S. Army Reserve (USAR) Exercise Divisions DIV (EX) conduct performance evaluations based on doctrine, mission training plans, training evaluation outlines, and their experience as subject-matter experts. The end result is challenging, realistic training with the added benefit of an external take home evaluation package. In fiscal year 1999, USAR chemical companies began the process of planning and executing inactive duty training (IDT) chemical lanes training. Lanes training is not a new exercise for these units. In fact, these exercises are routinely conducted as an integral part of the units annual training mission and evaluation. What was really challenging about the conduct of these particular exercises was that they occurred during an IDT or weekend drill period. Considering the time constraints that a Reserve Component unit faces (only 39 days a year to train for its mission), lanes training display a clear, strong determination to obtain the highest quality training possible. It also displays a serious dedication of the precious resource of training time. The question is, how do you ensure that your companies are prepared to participate and succeed in these exercises? To ensure the success of units in these exercises, the 457th Chemical Battalion outlined a training strategy that supported and enabled our units to excel in these exercises. Our training strategy was simple and forthright and was based soundly on the training principle of train using multiechelon techniques. Our challenge lay in two areas. First, develop a strategy that would orchestrate and maximize all of our training resources. Second, and key to the overall effort, develop and communicate a clear vision of our strategy and our training goals. The battalion S3 recognized that the lanes would provide our units and staff with an excellent opportunity to plan and conduct multiechelon training. Chemical lanes training is no different from the regular way the battalion planned training. Our units have always addressed and incorporated multiechelon training into all training plans. However, our strategy was to build and integrate detailed multiechelon training from the individual through collective levels. One

January 2000

35

key goal was to refine the validation and documentation process of multiechelon training. This was no easy task, considering the different types of chemical units involvedchemical battalion headquarters, dual-purpose chemical companies, mechanized smoke companies, and evaluator teams. At the individual and leader levels, the naturally occurring common-task test and leader validation tasks were identified from doctrine, soldier training publications, military qualification standards, mission training plans, and assessments. Collective tasks were selected based on assessments from past exercises, annual training missions, current battalion training guidance, and whether they supported the overall exercise. By the conclusion of the exercise, individuals and leaders were trained and validated in key mission-oriented tasks. The foundation of individual and leader training provided numerous training opportunities at the collective level. By using a command post exercise as a training vehicle for the staff, missions were generated in support of the overall chemical lanes exercise. Staff sections trained on staff-supporting collective tasks from the mission-essential task list while they obtained direct experience in command and control of subordinate units. In turn, company headquarters received valuable experience working with their parent headquarters while supporting their platoons in the chemical lanes. Once the tasks were reviewed and approved for training, the

battalion published specific guidance for all units participating in these exercises. In addition, a series of information briefings were conducted during all inprocess reviews. By conducting detailed briefings on the exercise, as well as including all unit leaders involved in the planning sessions, we successfully conveyed the commanders training goals to all participants and shaped the environment for a successful exercise. At the conclusion of these planning meetings, all aspects of training and its associated resources were orchestrated. By applying a multiechelon training strategy to this exercise, we achieved key training goals. First, we ensured that our units conducted sound training, documentation, and validation of tactical/technical skills in our soldiers and leaders. We are confident that our soldiers are trained and validated on key supporting individual tasks. Secondly, by shaping the exercise, we were able to maximize the training opportunity to benefit all levels of the command. Through the use of the train using multiechelon techniques principle, we developed a framework to ensure the success of our chemical companies during future lanes exercises and annual training missions.
At the time this article was written, CPT John Garnsey was the Operations Officer of the 457th Chemical Battalion. CPT Garnsey has served in various chemical positions in Army Reserve units. He has a bachelor of arts degree in Computer Resource Information Management from Webster University, St. Louis, Missouri. CPT Garnsey is currently a Software Engineer in PERSCOM Information Support Activity, St. Louis, Missouri.

Fort Leonard Wood has welcomed the last soldier to transfer here from Fort McClellan, Alabama. SSG Wanda Williford arrived 2 November and will be with By Specialist Kelly Whitteaker, the 82nd Chemical Battalion as the units personnel sergeant. GUIDON Staff While at Fort McClellan, Williford was with the 39th Reception Battalion. The hardest part about leaving was closing 39th, trying to push the soldiers through in time, she said. Williford had optimistic things to say about Fort Leonard Wood, beginning with the personnel at the Soldier Service Center. The people here have been so good and positive. They have a professional attitude, she said. Williford added that she liked the post and its facilities. Maneuver Support Center CSM Robert Dils, Chemical Regimental CSM James Van Patten III, and 82nd Chemical Battalion CSM Peter Hiltner welcomed Williford to the Williford (left) gets a warm welcome from Staff Sgt. installation and presented her with a post coin.
Denise Ross at the in-processing office. 36

Last Fort McClellan soldier signs in to Fort Leonard Wood

CML

NBC

A Proactive Combat Multiplier

By Major Robert Karnes, 28th ID (M), Assistant Division Chemical Officer

Contamination avoidance, force protection, NBC defense, vulnerability analysis, and technical and tactical proficiency are terms widely used throughout the Chemical Corps. These terms and many others refer to the tenets of NBC defense and the skills required of all Chemical Corps officers. These terms and skills came to bear when the 28th Infantry Division (Mechanized) participated in a warfighter exercise in February and March 1999. The NBC staff of the 28th ID (M) learned many lessons ranging from vulnerability analysis and intelligence preparation of the battlefield (IPB) through NBC warning and reporting to NBC logistics and smoke operations.
When planning NBC support in division operations, the chemical officer must obtain the division commanders intent for NBC defense and smoke operations. Once this is received, the chemical staff can effectively begin the ongoing task of vulnerability analysis and intelligence preparation of the battlefield. I recommend posting a chart with the commanders guidance next to the NBC situation map to keep the NBC staff focused during the planning and execution phases of the battle. Division Commanders Guidance for NBC Defense and Smoke: Aggressively reconnoiter forward to locate and mark contamination for bypass. Fight through during the attack to avoid loss of momentum, if unit encounters new contamination. Conduct operational decon as far forward as possible to maintain momentum. Integrate smoke to support corps decontamination and to conceal high-value assets (i.e., Patriot Missiles). recommend chemical unit task organization, and then wait for the NBC 1 reports to arrive. This is a good first step. However, other items also should be considered to ensure total force protection. The chemical officer must conduct aggressive, ongoing intelligence preparation of the battlefield to meet both the commanders intent and the NBC defense tenet of contamination avoidance. The 28 ID (M) also used: Chemical downwind messages and weather forecasts. Enemy maneuver unit locations (known and templated). Enemy NBC unit locations (known and templated). Enemy doctrine for chemical use. Enemy agents of choice. Engineer overlay showing known enemy obstacles. Friendly maneuver graphics. List of possible enemy chemical attack indicators obtained from the corps order. By simultaneously using all of these items (many of which are overlays), we developed numerous possible event-driven, enemy chemical usage locations within the division area of operation. By continually updating and analyzing these items, we could inform the commander of possible effects of chemical employment at any given location/time with respect to the scheme of maneuver. This information gave him operational flexibility to continue to fight the battle
37

. . . .

. . . . . . . .

This article focuses primarily on those aspects of vulnerability analysis and intelligence preparation of the battlefield that relate to the division close battle (the area of operations forward of the maneuver brigades rear boundaries). Many chemical officers analyze the friendly scheme of maneuver and terrain in the unit area of operations to develop NBC named areas of interest,
January 2000

without losing momentumeven after chemicals were employed against us. Here is how we did it. We began to analyze the situation by placing all of the listed overlays on the map at once and applying our understanding of the enemy doctrine for chemical employment. The enemy forces overlay from G2 showed the expected disposition of forces, including templated boundaries between units. The engineer overlay showed the known obstacles in the area of operation. By comparing the two overlays, we identified potential enemy counterattack routes, gaps in his obstacles, and (by the positioning of his chemical units coupled with the weather forecasts) possible chemical attack locations. We then compared the friendly scheme of maneuver in relation to the enemy positioning. This comparison enabled us to determine several potential areas where the division was vulnerable to chemical attacksto slow our momentum or channel us by denying terrain. These areas became NBC named areas of interest and were assigned to appropriate units for reconnaissance. This information, coupled with the commanders intent for NBC, allowed us to tailor the chemical unit task organization to best support the operations. The system worked extremely well. In the after-action review in the division tactical command post (DTAC), the facilitator asked for one sustain and one improve comment from each section represented. The sustain comment for NBC did not come from the chemical officer; it came from the G2 representative. He said, You guys were a pain in my butt, always looking for information. That is a positive. Proactive, integrated NBC we have never had that. The improve comment came from the chemical officer. He stated that to improve was to better understand and utilize smoke in the division attack. We succeeded in preparing the forces to deal with the presence of chemicals on the battlefield. As with any successful mission, we encountered problems. We suffered a few chemical casualties. Most of these casualties were caused by difficulties in using the NBC Warning and Reporting System within the division. One instance, a small unit reported a chemical attack in sector. Their report allowed the DTAC to provide early warning and then maneuver the follow-on brigade around the hazard area without losing any momentum. This is just one example of how the training paid off. But some artillery units moved through the hazard, took casualties, and required decontamination.
38

The DTAC warned the maneuver forces early and coordinated the avoidance. (While waiting for the NBC 3 report from the NBC center, the DTAC called units in the immediate area of the attack and told them There is a strike at x location, the wind is blowing in y direction, take ZZZZ precautions.). This incident taught us two things. First, we must warn all battlefield operating systems supporting the maneuver. Second, redundant warnings from both the DTAC and NBC center are better than poorly timed or no warnings at all. The NBC center in the division main command post experienced delays in preparing and sending the NBC 3 report to all units. To avoid such delays, the NBC center now will prepare and send an NBC 3 report to all units immediately after it receives an NBC 1 report. We then will verify the validity of the NBC 1 report. We will publish a change in our tactical SOP to document this change in procedure. In another instance, we received an NBC 1 report from a brigade. The DTAC quickly warned those units (other than the brigade submitting the report) that could be immediately affected. This procedure seemed to work perfectly, although another battalion in the brigade submitting the report maneuvered through the hazardous area sustaining casualties and contamination. The lesson: Even though a brigade sends up an NBC report, do not assume that all of its units will avoid the area. Tell brigade what to do to minimize contamination. Smoke operations were extensive in this exercise. Since we faced both rear-area and aerial threats, the division support area was smoked almost continuously with both generated smoke and smoke pots. This presented three challenges: troop safety, logistics, and area coverage. Limited smoke assets could not provide 24hour, full-area coverage. Fog oil was in short supply and was also required for follow-on combat operations. According to FM 3-50, soldiers operating in HexaChloroethane (HC) smoke (smoke pots) must wear protective masks, as do soldiers operating for more than four hours in a fog-oil smoke haze. Enemy observation was limited because their systems operated in the visual range of the electromagnetic spectrum. So we smoked the division support area in the morning and late afternoon to extend the hours of limited visibility (darkness included) without degrading troop performance by requiring them to wear protective masks for extended periods. The maneuver also had planned extensive smoke operations. Coordinating the use of mobile smoke, smoke pots, and projected smoke in offensive operations
CML

. .

was a challenge. Lessons learned were: Brigades must submit deliberate smoke plans to division NBC center early to avoid conflict with other battlefield operating systems (that is, Army Airspace Command and Control). Four mechanized smoke platoons cannot provide a mobile smoke haze across an entire division front. We must identify critical portions of our attack formations where smoke (haze/curtain) can be successfully employed. These areas must be coordinated with deceptive smoke to draw the enemys attention away from our intentions and/or force him to expend assets to deal with our deception. The use of mobile smoke to conceal attacking mechanized/armor forces can be a good combat multiplier. However, this smoke can also be a combat detractor. These attacking forces can easily outrun the smoke units and become silhouetted, which could be worse than providing no smoke at all. Deliberate- and hasty-smoke operations must be tightly coordinated with maneuver brigade commanders. In this exercise, deliberate, mobile smoke was almost completely abandoned (due to weather and enemy location) in favor of hasty smoke employed at the discretion of the brigade commanders. From this point on, division lost situational awareness with respect to when and where smoke was used on the battlefield. We must coordinate with division artillery to ensure adequate resources are available for projected smoke at critical points in the battle (especially if wind conditions do not support the use of generated smoke or smoke pots). Additionally, all companysized units had a basic load of smoke pots, many of which were not used. Smoke pots can be used to supplement generated smoke and stand-alone smoke to conceal high value assets.

biggest challenge for the NBC center is tracking who is using smoke when and where, so that other battlefield operating system staffs know where friendly smoke is located. We will publish a change in our tactical SOP and add a smoke-planning template in our operational order format to address these challenges. Conducting intelligence preparation of the battlefield and organizing the NBC-task organization to support the commanders intent is easy compared to figuring logistical needs and how to conduct resupply operations. In this exercise, fog oil and Mogas resupply for smoke units was coordinated and took place when the maneuver units slowed down to refuel/rearm on the move. This worked well. Water for decontamination operations was a big challenge because there was no appreciable water source in our area of operation. We were able to supply and conduct two operational decontaminations. However, since we were not required to conduct a thorough decontamination, the engineer support, water availability, and chemical defense equipment resupply were not tested. The NBC staff of 28 ID (M) has learned the value of proactive, integrated NBC and the importance of timeliness in the NBC Warning Reporting System. We also recognize the challenges of coordinating smoke operations and NBC resupply. These lessons, and others, are being incorporated into our tactical SOP so we will be better prepared to support winning efforts on future battlefields.
MAJ Robert Karnes is currently assigned as the Assistant Division Chemical Officer (Tactical Chemical Operations Officer) for the 28th Mechanized Infantry Division of the Pennsylvania Army National Guard. His previous assignments include Battalion Chemical Officer, 10 Mountain Division, Senior TAC Officer, and the Pennsylvania OCS. He is a graduate of CAS3, Chemical Officer Advanced Course, and Chemical Officer Basic Course. In his civilian career, he is the assistant lab manager and plant chemist for a hazardous waste recycling facility. MAJ Karnes holds a bachelors degree in Chemistry from Bloomsburg University of Pennsylvania.

. .

Use of smoke assets in hasty-defense operations and deceptive operations worked fine in this exercise. We just need to better coordinate deliberate- and deceptive-smoke operations to mutually support each other, as well as the commanders intent for smoke. The

January 2000

39

National Guard Welcomes New Members


420th Chemical Battalion

By Major Robert J. Coy


The Washington Army National Guard Unit welcomed its newest members during a ceremony on 3 October 1999the 420th Chemical Battalion and its subordinate unit, the 790th Chemical Company (Recon/Decon). Both units are not only new to the Washington National Guard, they are also new to the United States Army. During the ceremony at Athanum Youth Park in Union Gap, LTC Robert L. Bray Sr., 420th Chemical Battalion; CPT Alan R. Johnson, Headquarters Detachment located in Yakima, Washington; and CPT Cynthia Millonzi, 790th Chemical Company located in Grandview, Washington, assumed command of the units.
Photo courtesy of Major Robert J. Coy

LTC Robert L. Bray Sr. (back to camera) with CPT Cynthia Millonzi and 1st SGT Laughery of the new 790th Chemical Company at the ceremony in Union Gap.

Senior National Guard and active Army military officials, civic leaders, and the mayor of Yakima participated in the ceremony. Adding something unique to the ceremony, the Eisenhower High School band and students from the West Valley High School Junior ROTC also participated . The band played the national anthem, the Army Song, and the Chemical Corps march. The Junior ROTC provided the color guard. In the next three years, the battalion will be adding the 791st Chemical Company (Recon/ Decon) in training year 2001, 792nd Chemical Company (Recon/Decon) in training year 2002, and the 793rd Chemical Company (BIDS) in training year 2003.
Major Robert J. Coy is the Battalion Executive Officer for the 420th Chemical Battalion (Washington National Guard). He is a graduate of the Command and General Staff College. He has held assignments with numerous commands including the 4th Brigade, 91st Division (Army Reserves), the 2nd Armored Cavalry Regiment (Active), the 9th Infantry Division (Active), all at Fort Lewis, Washington,

Photo courtesy of Major Robert J. Coy

LTC Robert L. Bray Sr. salutes the West Valley High School Junior ROTC color guard.

40

CML

U.S. Army Chemical School Directory


At the time this publication went to press, the following roster represented the Chemical School listings. However, changes are being made constantly. Building 3203 Commercial Callers: Dial the main switchboard and when asked, dial the last five digits of the telephone number. The phone number for the switchboard is area code 573-596-0131. DSN Callers: If the extension begins with 3, the DSN prefix is 676. If the extension begins with 6, the DSN prefix is 581. * Denotes direct line. Dial area code 573 and phone number.

COMMANDANT (ATSN-CMZ) COL Patricia L. Nilo, 563-8053* REGIMENTAL COMMAND SERGEANT MAJOR CSM James E. Van Patten III, 563-8051* NBC JOINT SERVICE INTEGRATION GROUP (JSIG) (ATSC-CMZ-JS) Director, LTC Leslie Koch, 3-7754 Project Admin Coordinator, Ms. Melissa Engelking, 3-7770 Materiel Requisition, Mr. Bruce Christich, 3-7758 Doctrine, Mr. Paul Short, 3-6200 CB Budget, Mr. Mark Garner, 3-7773 Science & Technology, Mr. John Scully, 3-7765 Models & Simulations, Mr. Karl Zart, 3-7763 Medical Integrator, Mr. Rick Prouty, 3-7772 ASSISTANT COMMANDANT (ATSN-CM) COL Thomas W. Klewin, 563-8054* OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY ASSISTANT COMMANDANT (ATSN-CM-DAC) Deputy Assistant Commandant, COL Tom Kutz, 563-8050* Deputy Assistant Commandant Army National Guard, LTC Thomas Hook, 3-7365 Training Developer, Ms. Constance Singleton, 3-7685 TOTAL ARMY SCHOOL SYSTEM (TASS) ACCREDITATION Chief, MAJ Sergio Dickerson, 3-7687 NCOIC, SFC Gary Farris, 3-7688
January 2000

OPERATIONS (ATSN-CMA) Executive Officer, MAJ Rodney Murray, 563-8052* Operations Officer, CPT Gloria Cox, 3-7351 Admin Sergeant, SSG Pamela Alexander, 3-7348 Office Services Coordinator, Ms Veronica Byrd, 3-7334 Visitor Support, SFC Linda Bowe, 3-7342 DOCTRINE TRAINING LEADER DEVELOPMENT ORGANIZATION MATERIAL & SOLDIERS (DTLOMS) (ATSN-CM-D) Director, LTC Roger Bushner, Jr., 3-6652 Deputy Director, LTC Brian Ballinger, 3-7371 Staff Officer, CPT Katrisa Rich, 3-7680 NCOIC, SFC Ivor Griffiths, 3-7683 DOCTRINE (ATSC-DOCT) Chief, LTC Cindy Jenkins, 3-7363 DOC/SRT/SME, CPT Chet Kemp, 3-7364 DOC/SRT/SME, CPT John Hanson, 3-7361 EXP/TD/WTR, SSG John Rousseau, 3-7671 Technical Writer, Mr. Dale Chapman, 3-7672 PERSONNEL PROPONENCY (ATSC-CM-DP) FAX 563-8063* Chief, MAJ Daniel Murray, 3-7692 Proponency Sergeant Major, SGM Kimberely Garrick. 3-7376 CMF Analyst, SFC Gary Valenzuela, 3-7662 Illustrator, SPC Vincent Mouzon, 3-7399 Proponency Analyst, Mr. Thomas Crow, 3-7728

41

THEATER MISSLE DEFENSE (ATSN-CM-TMD) Chief, Mr. Henry Meyer, 3-7693 Analyst, Mr. Constant Craig, 3-7324 DIRECTORATE OF COMBAT DEVELOPMENT INTEGRATION (ATSN-CM-DCD) Chief, CD Integration, Mr. Jerry Bazzetta, 3-7673 Expert Senior CD NCO, SFC Kevin Kruise, 3-7676 DIRECTORATE OF TRAINING DEVELOPMENT INTEGRATION (ATSN-CM-DTD) Chief, Mr. Thomas Lennek, 3-7665 Training Developer, Dr. JoJo Corkan, 3-7664 Training Developer, Ms. Emily Penland, 3-7663 HEALTH PHYSICS OFFICE Manager, Mr. John May, 3-6224 NCOIC, SFC John Aperans, 3-6229 Health Physics Tech, SSG Ronald DeGumbia, 3-6228 HISTORIAN (ATSN-CMA-H) Dr. Burton Wright, 3-7339 3RD CHEMICAL BRIGADE Commander, COL Allan C. Hardy, 596-0016* Command Sergeant Major, CSM Larry Fisher, 6-2271 Executive Officer, LTC George G. Coffelt, 6-2276 S-3, MAJ Bret VanCamp, 6-8320 CHEMICAL DEFENSE TRAINING FACILITY (CDTF) Director, MAJ George Heib, 596-0608* Operations Officer, CPT(P) Kent Soebbing, 6-1661 Chief Instructor, MSG William Gunter, 596-0365* Operations NCO, SFC Lamar Garrett, 6-1662 82D CHEMICAL BATTALION (CML OSUT) Commander, LTC Lewis VanDyke, 596-0342* Command Sergeant Major, CSM Peter Hiltner, 596-0342* Executive Officer, MAJ Phillip Trued, 6-7056 S-3, CPT Barry McDowell, 6-7058 A Co, Commander, CPT Michael Maguire, 596-0345* 1SG Angela Pitts, 6-0345 B Co, Commander, CPT Todd Buffington, 6-4740 1SG John M. Burns, 6-7620 C Co, Commander, CPT Erinn Hardaway, 596-0347* 1SG David Wint, 6-0347 D Co, Commander, CPT Stephanie Bracero, 596-0348* 1SG William Miller, 6-2746
42

84TH CHEMICAL BATTALION Commander, LTC Gary Harter, 6-2414 Command Sergeant Major, CSM Winston R. Canady, 6-2415 Executive Officer, MAJ James Bayha, 6-2400 S-3, CPT Andrew Herbst, 596-0285* HHC, Commander, CPT Corey Griffiths, 6-7323 1SG Robert McKenzie, 6-7323 A Co, Commander, MAJ Antonio Amos, 6-7589 1SG Whitfield, 6-7588 C Co, Commander, CPT Mike Hunter, 6-2670 1SG Anderson, 6-0275 TECHNICAL TRAINING DEPARTMENT (ATSC-TTD) Chief, MAJ William Steele, 3-7379 OIC, BIO (B), CPT Richard Howell, 3-7322 NCOIC, SFC Gregory Smith, 3-7331 Chief, RAD LAB (RL), Mr. Thomas Robinson, 3-6210 NCOIC, RAD LAB, SFC Robert Derr, 3-6202 OIC, TAC RAD (TR), CPT Robert Lutz, 3-7697 NCOIC, TAC RAD, SFC Cynthia Evans, 3-7696 OIC, RECON BR, CPT Daryl Hood, 3-7384 NCOIC, RECON BR, SFC Avery Woods, 3-7389 58TH TRANSPORTATION BATTALION (TRANS AIT) Commander, LTC Ronnie Ellis, 596-0991* Command Sergeant Major, CSM Teresa King, 596-0991* Executive Officer, MAJ Gini Guiton, 596-0991* HHC Commander, CPT Matthew Brown, 6-7792 1SG Rickey Gethers, 6-7967 A Co, Commander, CPT Lawrence Woodrow, 6-7581 1SG Louis Lee, 6-1047 B Co, Commander, CPT Megan Koser, 6-7765 1SG Kelly Flannery, 6-7764

CML

Book Review

By USACMLS Command Historian, Dr. Burton Wright

Biohazard: The Chilling True Story of the Largest Covert Biological Weapons Programs in the WorldTold from Inside by the Man Who Ran It, Ken Alibek with Stephen Handelman. New York: Random House, 1999.
For nearly two decades, Dr. Ken Alibek worked with the most lethal pathogens in the world. His principal job was to make them useful for weapons that could be used by the Soviet Union against its enemies. This book provides an insight into his mind and why he chose to do this type of research. Dr. Alibek is no fanatic; hes a servant of a state. He did research with the expectation that it would protect his nation. He was a patriot, but soon realized that the work he was doing violated the first and most sacred commandment that a physician upholdsto preserve human life. The USSR spent billions of dollars on both the military and civilian sides represented by an organization called BIOPREPARAT. Dr. Alibek, its first deputy director, invented the most powerful strain of Anthrax in the world. Most experts in biological warfare consider Anthrax to be one of the most preferred agents to use in war because of its virulence and hardiness. The Soviet Union developed missile-nosed cones loaded with weaponized anthrax spores to put atop ICBMs to shoot at any country within range of the missile. The level of sophistication of BIOPREPARAT was astonishing. One chapter is entitled BONFIRE, which the author tells us was the code name for one of the most chilling examples of biowarfare. BONFIRE was nothing less than the development of bioweapons that, when inhaled into the body, caused the body to kill itself. The author demonstrates that the Russians are still at work on bioweapons and have even succeeded in putting several lethal pathogens into the same disease (i.e., mixing Marburg with the plague). The authors journey from a faithful servant of the state to a defector is revealing. The final straw came when the government asked Dr. Alibek to say in his report to the Central Committee that the United States was still working on offensive biological weapons. He knew from personal visits to Americas bioresearch facilities that this was not true. As Dr. Alibek mentioned in the first part of the book, his initial work in the field of lethal bioweapons was based on his view that the United States was doing the same thing. At one time this was true, but in 1969 the United States dismantled its offensive biological program. At the same time, Russia increased its program. Dr. Alibek was afraid that Russias biological weapons program could be used to create a terrible weapon that could be misused by the government. As the author notes, the United States does not need to begin offensive research again. But we do need to look for a stronger bioweapons defense, and or vaccines that can build up the bodys resistance to the types of bioweapons he developed while in BIOPREPARAT. His expert knowledge of bioweapons research will help the United States and its allies develop adequate defenses against the very agents he created at BIOPREPARAT. With all the information contained in this book as well as others recently published about the extent and sophistication of Iraqs biowarfare programs, the West in general, and the United States in particular, need to seriously address the development of a strong defensive program. If you read nothing else this year, read this book.

January 2000

43

Subcribe to CML, Army Chemical Review


New Subscriptions: Use the subscription form below. Cost for a subscription is $10.00 (domestic and APO/FPO) or $12.50 (foreign). Renewal Subscription: To keep subscription prices down, the Government Printing Office mails each subscriber only one renewal notice. To be sure that your service continues without interruption, please return your notice promptly. If your subscription service is discontinued, simply send your mailing label from any issue to the Superintendent of Documents, Attn: Mail List Branch, Mail Stop: SSOM, Washington, DC 20402, with the proper remittance and your service will be reinstated. Address Changes: Please send your mailing label, along with your new address to the Superintendent of Documents, Attn: Mail List Branch, Mail Stop: SSOM, Washington, DC 20402. Inquiries About Subscription Service: Please send your mailing label, along with your correspondence, to Superintendent of Documents, Attn: Mail List Branch, Mail Stop: SSOM, Washington, DC 20402. Telephone number (202) 512-1800.

Subscription Order Form


United States Government INFORMATION
Order Processing Code:

Credit card orders are welcome!


Fax your orders (202) 512-2250 Phone your orders (202) 512-1800

*5907 YES, please send________subscriptions to: CML, Army Chemical Review (ACJ) at $10 each ($12.50 foreign) per year.
The total cost of my order is $________.
Name or title (Please type or print)

Price includes regular shipping and handling and is subject to change.

Company name

Room, floor, suite

Check method of payment: Check payable to: Superintendent of Documents GPO Deposit Account VISA Mastercard Discover
(expiration date) Zip code+4

Street address

/
City State

Daytime phone including area code

Authorizing signature

Thank you for your order!


Purchase order number (optional)

Mail to: Superintendent of Documents, PO Box 371954, Pittsburgh PA 15250-7954


Important: Please include this completed order form with your remittance. 44 CML

CHIEFS OF CHEMICAL
Past to Present
1. Major General William L. Sibert, 1918-1920 2. Major General Amos Fries, 1920-1929 3. Major General Harry Gilchrist, 1929-1933 4. Major General Claude B. Brigham, 1933-1937 5. Major General Walter C. Baker, 1937-1941 6. Major General William Porter, 1941-1945 7. Major General Alden Wiatt, 1945-1949 8. Major General Anthony Macauliffe, 1949-1951 9. Major General Egbert F. Bullene, 1951-1954 10. Major General William M. Creasy, 1945-1958 11. Major General Marshall Stubbs, 1958-1963 12. Brigadier General Fred J. Delmore, 1963-1964 13. Major General Lloyd B. Fellenz, 1964-1967 14. Major General John J. Hayes, 1967-1972 15. Major General John G. Appel, 1972-1974 16. Major General Peter G. Olenchuk, 1974-1975 17. Major General John K. Stoner, Jr., 1975-1980 18. Major General Alan A. Nord, 1980-1985 19. Major General Gerald G. Watson, 1985-1989 20. Major General Robert D. Orton, 1989-1994 21. Major General Ralph G. Wooten, 1994-1999 22. Colonel Patricia L. Nilo, 1999-

January 2000

45