UNCLASSIFIED

AD NUMBER

LIMITATION CHANGESTO:

FROM:

AUTHORITY

THIS PAGE IS UNCLASSIFIED

AD306321

Approved for public release; distribution isunlimited. Document partially illegible.

Distribution authorized to U.S. Gov't. agenciesand their contractors;Administrative/Operational Use; 09 FEB 1959.Other requests shall be referred to ChemicalWarfare Laboratories, Army Chemical Center, MD.Document partially illegible.

ECBC memo dtd 11 Jul 2016

UNCLASSIFIED

AD NUMBER

AD306321

CLASSIFICATION CHANGES

TO

unclassified

FROM

confidential

AUTHORITY

USACC ltr, 1 Dec 1980

THIS PAGE IS UNCLASSIFIED

. - I o1wINI

Armud Services Technicali [nformation agencyARLINGTON HALL STATION

ARLINGTON 12 VIRGINIA

FOR

MICRO-CARD

NTRO11CEL WHEN GOVERNMENT OR OTHER DRAWINGS, SPECIFICATIONS OR OTHER DATATUMD FOR ANY PURPOSE OTHER THAN IN CONNECTION WITH A DEFINrTELY RELATEDGOVERNMENT PROCUREMENT OPERATION, THE U. S. GOVERNMENT THEREBY INCURSNO RESPONSiBILITY, NOR ANY OBLIGATION WHATSOEVER; AND THE FACT THAT THEGOVERNMENT MAY HAVE FORMULATED, FURNISHED, OR IN ANY WAY SUPPLIED THESAID DRAWINGS, SPECIFICATIONS, OR OTHER DATA IS NOYT TO BE REGARDED BY!MPLICATIOI OR OTHERWISE AS IN ANY MANNER LICEN2ING THE HOLDER OR ANY OTH,ERPERSON OR CORPORATION, OR CONVEYING ANY RIGH'TS OR PERMISSION TO MANUFACTURE,USE OR SELL ANY PATENTED INVENTION THAT MAY IN AlrrV WAY BE RELATED THERETO.

A gga

CONFIDENTIAL

CWIL TMflFNICAL 4l",-.,lRADTTM 33-18

FC 7t.,IUCft ~L~~HALL STATION

S~~

ASTIAS

IINTEIM REPORT

CI) CWr, TRAVERSAL PROGRAM

*~: "~21-ASE-A - PESISTENLCE

byLJK iL '

ANormRn ReichC

"IThe trnfor'matior, in. this mnorarndum is issuedfor tem-orairy :)- li-,ited use only, ind 't ,)Rybe 91-oersecied-."

Diroctoroteo f Dev' lom)-ornet1KAr-,.-., Ohemic n rfere 1,nbornt')ries

Armn hy c~ Center,:',a2ryjland

CONFIDENTIAL

Sest -Availabla C0-

This document is the property of the United StatesGovernment. It is furnished for the duration of the contract and

shall be returned when no longer required, or uponrecall by ASTIA to the following address:

Armed Services Technical Information Agency, Arlington Hall Station,Arlington 12, Virginia

NOTICE: THIS DOCUMENT CONTAIN3 INFORMATION AFFECTING THE

NATIONAL DEFENSE OF THE UNITED STATES WITHIN THE MEANING

OF THE ESPIONAGE LAWS, TITLE 18, U.S.C., SECTIONS 793 and 794.

THE TRANSMISSION OR THE REVELATION OF ITS CONTENTS IN

ANY MANNER TO AN UNAUTHORIZED PERSON IS PROHIBrTED BY LAW.

a

.5 6

CONFIDENTIAL

CWL Technical Memorandum 33-18 . ,"Status Report " Norman ReichCWL Traversal Program AuthorPhase A - Persistence

Submitted:

RoberV M. blackChief, Planning & Evaluation Brancb

Recommending Approval:Notebook Nos: h756

4s928h 9hht,

6013 All60896116 CHARLES E. MILLM

Chief, Test Division

APPROVED:

R. D, ChAPMANColonel, CmlCDirector of Development

CONFIDENTIAL2

TABLE OF CONTENTS PageI. INTRODUCTION ."........................a4

1I BACKGROUI . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

III. EXPMIM EAL . . . . . ... . .. . . .. . .. . ... . . 5

A. Procedure ......... ....................... 5

Bo Preparation of Test Sites ...... ............... 5

C. Agent-Dissemination Teohniques ............... . 5

Do Sampling Techniques ....... ......... ....... 6

3. Test Results . . . . . . ... a . . . .... 7

IV. SUPPLEMMITARY TRIALS ..... ....................... 9

A, Field Test No. 1979 ....... ................. 10

B. Field Test No. 1976. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

C. Field Test No. 1980. . . ........ . . . . . . ii

D. Test Plan No. 29 . . ................. 1

"" DISCUSSION. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13

AIPENDIXES

Ao Tabulated Data ..... .............. .15

B. Graphs . . . . . . . . . . . 4 . . ... . . . 20

C. Photographs .... ...................... 24

D, Reports. . . . . . . ........ . . . . . . . . . 27

CONFIDENTIALABSTRACT

C) Object.

The object of this phase of the Traversal Program is to study thepersistence of V-agent in various tyes of terrain,

(C) Results, !

Twenty-three soil plots were contaminated with agent, dispersed indensities rarging from 0.3 to 31.5 g/sq m and in pp.rticles having mass mediandiameters from less than 200 to 4,100 microns. The quantity of agent in thetop I/2-in. layer of soil, as determined by chemical analysis of soil plugs,was found to fluctuate considerably, and therefore no well defined relation-ship between residual contamination and time could be established. However,the fitted decay curves indicated a rapid decline in residual contaminationfollowed by a leveling off at very minute concentrations. The individualeffects of specific parameters were not easily disoernable from the data;however, evidence existed to indicate that meteorological conditions hadsome effect on persistene (ie, high temperature and rainfall reduce persist-ence). More than 80% of all clipped rabbits died when exposed to contamina-ted surfaces within an hour after the soil was contaminated. The number ofkills dropped to belov 20% when the exnosure was one day folloing thedissemination of aget.

Eight skeid plots were contaminated with agent dispersed in densities ofapproximately 6.5 tco 20 g/sq m and in particles with mass median diametersranging from about 210 to 3,600 microns. All animals exposed to these plotsone and 24 hours following the dissemination of agent were killed; exposureafter one week resulted in no deaths even though the presence of residualagent was detectable by chemical analysis of 1/2-in. deep sand plugs. Thecurves of residual contamination density vs time for both soil and sand were

Lthe same ha and differences in rtes o 31ine were attiibutable to thedifferences in physical characteristias of e two med a.

Ni plots of grass sod with dense vegetation about three inches tallwere con a inted to densities 0.3 to 17 gfnq m with agent dispersed inparticles ranging from about 200 to 500 microns. The results of animalexposure indicated V-agent was less persistent on both grassy terrain and soilthan on sand.

Since the residual contamination as detected in the top 1/2-in. layer ofterrain did not agree with the results of animal exposure, a blotting-typesurface sampler was developed to measure the quantity of transferable agenton the surface. Its employment in a series of sunplementary trials indicatedthat the contamination on the sorface declined much more rapidly and was moreadversely affected by weather than was the contamination in the 1/2-in. layerof terrain. Whereas VX in terrain was chemically detectable for weeks afterthe dissemination of agent, the surface contaminntion persisted only a fewdays.

CONFIDENTIAL3

. . . ...

CONFIDENTIALINTERIM REOR

CWL TRAVERSAL PROGRAMPHASE A -PER~SISTENCE

I, (U) INTRODUCTION.

A. Object.

The object of~ this phase of the Traversal Program is to study the

persistence of V-agent in 'various types of~ terrain.

B. Authoritz.

This investigation vas authorized in the Chemical Warfare LaboratoriesT reversal Program, dated 25, March 1957,

II.(C) BACKG1EOUND.

he T reversal Program, implement d by direction of the Deputy Commnderfor Scientific Activities,, U.S. Army Chemical Warfare Laboratories, is detailedin a C'WL documnt, subjectt The Casualty Producing Capability of V-agent~ whenDisperoed as Terrain Contaminant (C), dated 25 March 1957. This program,, whoseprimary objective is to estimate potential casualties arising from traversal andoccupational hazards, is divided into the following three phases:

Phase A - Persistence and Decontamination - Determining the persistence ofV-agents in the field and factors governing this persistence.

Phase B - Pick-Up - Determining the degree of pick-up by personnel traversingor occupying areas on which V-agent is dispersed as a terrain contamrinant. p 1 I

Phase C - Casualty Production - Estimating the effectiveness of thids pick-upin producing casualties.

Although portions of all three phases were and are currently being conductedAimultaneously, this report deals sole1l with that subdivision of Phase A concernedwith investigating the persistence of IX In subsequent reports, tha~ lt ofother trials condi'-.ted under the scope"-o f the Traversal Program will be covered.

*Experiments to inyestigate the persistence of V1 on soil, sandI, and vegetatedterrain as a function of general terrain characteristics, and the contaminationdensity and particle size of the dispersed agent were initiated in March 1957LThe data accuNulated since that date, including some previously reported in-formation *, are presented here. AThese results and the inferences drawn thorefromare regarded as interim in nature, and as such are issued for temporary or li=mtduse only. They may be superseded when additional data arv received and evaluated.

_______________________________/ t?

* WE Te-hniial ?4omorandu 33-9, subject: The Casualty Producing Capability orV-Agen'. When Dispersed as Terrain Contaminant (C), Interim Rteport, Phase A-Persistence; A. Koblin, W.C. Johnson, and A. Deiner; dated 9 October 1957.

CONFIDENTIAL4

CONFIDENTIALIII. (c) EXPERIA21TAL.

A. Procedure,

Trials investigating the persistence of VX in soil, sand, andvegetated terrain were conducted ganerally in accordance with Test Plan No. 23,which appears as appendix B to the CWL Traversal Program, dated 25 March 1957.As provided for in the test plan, agent was uniformly disnersed in variouscontamination densities and particle sizes on prepared test plots, and atprescribed intervnls these 8rc-as were checked for the presence of residual agentby chemical snmnlin- nnd ,nimal exposure. Throughout the test period a detailedrecord of prevailing meteorological conditions was maintained.

B. Preoaration of Test Sites.

1. Soil.

A;i area on Carroll Island was enclosed by a barbed-wire fenceand cleared of vagetatlon nnd extraneous matter. The soil in this nrea, Vhlchis described in v'poendi.x D, nnna disked, leveled, and p,3rfitted to settle orpack-down naturally for about one month before the site was subdivided into anumber of 1 x 10 ft test olots. Each teat olot was defined by a wooden frameas shown in fig'-e 1, appendix C. Tnrpaulin covers suonorted on frnmes wereprovided to protect some plots from direct solar radiation and rainfall. Thesecovers were raised above the ground to nermit the nassage of air over the testsurfaces, and were pitched to allow rain to run off into drainage ditches dug,between adjacent plots.

2. Sand,

In the gen'3ral vicinity of the soil plots, beach sand tranoortedfrom the shoreline of Carroll Island was deoosited in a layer one-foot thick. Ina manner as that described in per 1, above, the sand-covered area was subdividedinto test plots.

3. Sodded Terrain,

Commercial lawn sod was .aid in an area adjacent to the soil andsand plots. When the sod had taken root, the area was sectioned off into 3 x 10ft test plots. Prior to contaminnition, the test isite was periodically mowed tokeep the dense rrnss to a hei-ht of about 3 in,

C. Ant-i ?,emintion Teohniue,

Are.t w! r nrnli,d to the surfaces of test rlots in desi-ed contamina-tion dersti5e and article sizes by emnloymant of either ti-e acroburette, therricrobtrette, or tho soinninp-tip apparatus. The macroburett& nroducing "large"droplets (about 3,500 microns) and the microburette producing "medium" droplets

CONFIDENTIAL5

CONFIDENTIAL(ranging from about 800 to 1,500 microns) were operated in a similar manner.The burettes were filled with a specific quantity of agent which the operatormanually and visually attempted to distribute uniformly over the test plot.The spinning-tin was employed in generating "smmll" droplets with mass mediandiameters ranging from below 200 microns to about 800 microns. This anoaratus,which is described in-detail in CRLR 375*, is shown in fig 2, apoendix C. Theunit was mounted on a sled and was drawn back and forth along the longitudinalaxis of the test plot as agent was forced out through the tip by centrifugalaction. The desired contamination density and oarticle size distri.bution wereattaiiied by selecting the appropriate tip orifice -nd b-- controllin:- the ratesof revolution and traversal.

D. Samnling Techniques.

1. Ground-Deposition Sampling.

a. When burettes were employed to disperse agent, the exactquantLty of nrrnnt deoosited on the ground was known or could be easily ncertoinedfrom the calibrations on the burettes. Therefore, no field samling wam requiredfor measuring contaminntion densities. The average particle sizes of the dispersedagent was determined from the mass and/or volume of a number of captured droplets.

b. When the spinning-tip aiparatus was enployed, petri dishescontaining solvent (hexylene glycol) and coated microscope slides were placed inthe field. From the agent deposited in the petri dishes, as determined by D9-3analysis of the nolvent, the degree and uniformity of ground contamination wasascertained. Particle size distribution was obtained by measuring the spots onthe coated slidps with the eid of a microscope.

2. "Soil-Plug" Sampling.

Within an hour after contamination and at prescribed intervalsthereaftur, the uantity of residual agent in the tot 1/2-in. layer of' soil andsand was det, rmined. This was accomplished by removing plugs or cores of earthfrom the contaminated test plots, extracting these plugs with solvent (isopronylalcohol), and analyzing the extract for active agent by the DB-3 technique. (Thedimensions of the olugs were fixed to permit the analytical results to be givenin mass per unit area.)

3. Surface Sampling.

To estimate the quantity of a ent transferable from the surface,as opposed to the :unntity of agent in the I/2-in' layer, a blotting-type saomlerwas e-ployed as a substitute for or in conjunction with the "soil-plug" samnler,Absorbent cotton covered with cheese-cloth with a contact area of 8 sq in. wcspressed against the contaminated surface at a pressure of 5 lb/sq in. for 1 hr,The contaminn.oc -nd wns then extracted with solvent (isopropyl alcohol) and theextract was analyzed by the DP,-3 method.

*CRLR375, subject: An ap-aratus for the Production of Uniform Droplets (Spinning

Tip), A, Koblin, dated 23 September 1954. - (1

CONFIDENTIAL6

CONFIDENTIAL4. Animal Sampling,

At prescribed intervals after the dispersion of agent, rabbitswith their abdominal fur clippod were exposed for one hour to the contaminatedsurfaces of test plots, Since only percutaneous effects were sought, theanimals were restrained and otherwise rrevented from receiving doses of agentthrough other channels such as b., oral ingestion. Durin these exposures,approximately 50 sq cm of fur-free skin per kg of the rabbits' mass were indirect contact with contaminated surfaces. The quantity of tran7ferablecontaminant on test surfaces was indicated by the lethnl effects and cholineste-rase depressiotAs suffered by exnosed animals. Also, the indicated doses ofagent received by rabbits were calculated from time till Oeath and fractionalmortality of groups of exposed animals.

E. Test Results,

1. Soil.

During the period of March through August 1957, 23 soil plotswere contaminated with VX in densities ranging from 0.3 to 31.5 g/sq m andparticles having mass median diameters of about 200 to 4,1O microns. Thespecific conditions for individual trials, as well as test results, arepresented in table 1, appendix A. These re8ults are granhically depicted infigures 1 and 2, appendix B.

The chemical data (ie, the residual contamination densities asdetermined from soil plugs) show considerable fluctuation. As a result ofthese variations, trends and inferences, rather than clearly defined relation-ships, could be derived from these data. Also, because of these deviationsand the inability'to control the variables adequately in the field for extendedperiods of time (particularly meteorological conditions), assessment of specificeffects of individual parameters on persistence was difficult. However, to aidin identifying the trends and estimating the effects of pa.rameters, eui'ves weredrawn to show the relationship between eontamination density and time. Thegeneral shape of the curves indicated that the decline in residual contaminationwas initially very rapid and leveled off almost asymptotically with respect totime at minute concentrations; traces of VX were found several weeks after theagent was dispersed. The initial rate of decline seemed directly proportionalto the density of the disnarsed agent. Thus, regardless of the quantity of agentdisnersed, several days after dispersion the residual contamination becameessentially equal and ineffective. The rate of contamination decline was alsofound to be affected by meteorological conditions; that is, high tenperaturesand rainfall apeared to reduce persistence. All these effects seemed to beindependent of particle size.

The animals exoosed to contaminated test. plots were essentiallysampling tcols to indicate the nresenc,9 of VX available for transfer from thesurfaces. From deaths and/or depressions in cholinesterase levels of rabbitsexnosed in these tripls, it was learned that the surface contamination disaopearedwithin a matter of days. When agent was disseminated in densities below

CONFiDENTIAL7

.,'- ....... .-. . . .

CONFIDENTIAL7 g/sq m, few fatalities were suffered by animals exposed for one hour, at24 hours after the plot was contaminated (of, table 4, appendix A). Forhigher contaminations, deaths might be expected to occur upon exposureseveral days after the dissemination of agent.

A comparison of chemical and animal data obtained duringthese trials was made. Since the results, as presented in the following table,indicate that the quantity of agent in the top 1/2-in, layer of soil cannotbe directly correlated to animal kills, and hence, does not reflect the amountof agent available for transfer, a new blotting-type sampler (cf, Dar C, 3)was devised and employed to samole agent on the surface of terrain contaminatedby the detonation of candidate VX-filled munitions. The results of thasesupplementary trials (cf par IV) reveal that surface contamination declinesmuch more rapidly and is more adversely affected by weather than is thecontamination in the top 1/2-in. layer of soil. This condition tends to explainthe fact that animal kills appear more closely related to time than to thequantity of active agent extractable from soil plugs.

Rabbits Killed on l-Hr Exposure to Contaminated Soil

Residualcontamination Time After Initial Contamination

density1 our I 1 Day 1 Week/sqa Dead/E posed % Dead/Expose'd % 7e cosed

1 1.0 I0/18 55 2/18 11 5/28* 18;.1 - 2.0 5/6 83 0/4 0 0/4 02.1 - 3.0 2/2 100 3/8 38 1/2 50

3.1 - 4.0 6/6 100 j 2/8 254.1 - 5,o 2/2 100 2 ,/2 505.1 - 6.o 2/2 l00 16a1- 7.0 2/2 o100

_-"7.0_ 6/6 1O0 _ _1/6 17~Total 7 8/4 1

RM"S:

*Resid'ial contamlination density was determined by DB3 analysis of soil plugBtaken at the tiip of andimal exposure."*The five death~s resulted fronm exoosure of rabbits hen the ground tmerature

was 990P. Other Inconsistencies in the data are also attribute4 to excessivelyhigh or low groundl temperatures.

CONFIDENTIAL8

__.. ..6 . j - _.. .L- L .• 5'L 7"

CONFIDENTIAL2. Saad.

During the period of August through October 1957, sand plotswere contaminated with agent disseminated in densities of approximately 6.5 to20 C/sq m *nd particle sizes ranging in mass median diameters of about 200 to3,600 microns. The specific conditions for individual trials and test resultsare presented in table 2, appendix A. These results are graphicai±y depictedin figure 3, appendix B.

All animalb exposed for one hour to these plots one and 24 hoursafter the initial dissemination of agent died. 'Exposure after one week resultedin no deaths even though the presence of residual agent was diatectei by cyemicalanalysis of 1/2-inch deep sand plugs. Since curves of residual contamination vstime for both soil and sand are of the saie shape, and since differencec in thepersistency of VX in these media can be attributed to soil physics (ie, thedifferences in the general characteristics of soil Pnd sand), further to°ting!.n sand was suspended after the conduct of eight trials.

3. Sodded Terrain,

The general conditions of the trials involving the contaminationof sodded terrain and the results obtained from these trials are presented intable 3, anoendix A,

Three trials were conducted in January 1958, and six were conductedin June and July of the same year. The contamination densities and particlesize distributions mr.loyed were 0.3 to 17.2 /sq m with mass -nedian diameters of185 to 450 microns, resoectively. Since, in a general manner, these nine trialsindicated that the persistency of VX In soil, sand nnd sodded terrain is roughlyof the same ;,agnitude, further testing on sodded terrain was discontinued.

In the January trials, the residual contamination was obtained byadding the quantity of agent on grass (as determined by DB3 analysis of solventwashings of grass cMinned from 6 x 6-in. areas of the test plot) to that foundia t~le 1/2-in. layer of soil beneath the 'rass. In the later trials, thecontamination was obtained by emroloying th 183 technique to determine the, quantityof agent nick' d up by blotting-tyne surfaces samruners. Both techniques indicatedthat the rate cf fill off or deterioration of ground contamination was initiallyquite rafid. Also, despite the differences in sampling technique, the inverserelationship between persistence and tem,-raturC can be inferred from the chemicaldata. This inference might ilso be drawn from animal data which nroved somewhaterrntic due to botl, the extremely low and -igh rround tempiratures durin, thetest -'rnode.

IV. (C) SUPPLE ENTARY TRIALS.

During tho conduct of the following field trials which were not primarilyconcernod with Phna-e A of the Trnversal Program, VX-contmnt d terrain w.sFarlodtcally sn'i ad to orovide daita to munpleimnt the results nresented in nor ITI,abo'zo, derived through the execution of Test Plan No. 23.

CONFIDENTIAL9

CONFIDENTIALA. Field Test No. 1979.

On 5 March 1958 a VX-filled E5 land mine was detonated on the agenttest site on Carroll Island. One hour after burst and daily thereafter, soilplugs and surface samples were taken froa an area neart the burst poLnt wheregroso contamination resulted. All samples were analyzed for the prosence ofagent by both the DB3 and total phosphorus techniques. The resulting datatabulated below revealed that the contamination on the surface not onlydeclines more rapidly, but is also more adversely affected by rainfall thanis the~contamination in the ton 1/2-in. layer of soil. Also, the decliningDB3 to total-phosphorus ratio in the surface samples is indicative of thepossible degradation of VX on the surface of the terrain.

Residual Contamination at Various Times After theDetonation of an E5 Land Mine (MT 19

r. Residual contaminationDate Soil MD8oe Surface samples

_d IDB Phos DB_ Pos Remarks

5 Mar 58* 10.2 10.6 15.4 , 18.2

6 Mar 58 8.5 8.5 10.7 12.6 Av air temnerature7ar 58 0.8 2,7 1.0 1.1 during best period

10 Mar 58 10.7 1 10.3 1.7 2.2 was 360F. Approxi-i. Mar 58 8.1 8.3 1.7 2.6 mately 1.0 in. of12Mar58 66 67 1.6 2.rain fall between13ar586 6°7 1.6 . 13 and 17 March.13 Mar 58 6.8 ').8 2.5 4.5

17 Mar58 5.7 u-5 0.14 0.31*One hour following burst.

B. Field Test No. 1976.

On 23 April 1958 a VX-filled E13D bomblet was statictilly fired 10 ftabove groutid on the test site described in par A, ebove. The ground contnaina-"lion as low, nnd soil and surface samoling extended over a three-day period.The ink",iaLed rate of the decay in contaminatlon is represented by th follotingresidual contnaination densities ns determtined by DB3 analyses of samn1es takenone hour, one day, and two days after burst, resnectively: From i/2-in, deepsoil olugs, 294, 50, and 42 mg/s4 %; and frrm surface samples, 89, 39, and7 mg/sq m. (Note: 0.22 in. of rain fell between the second Pnd third samnlingperiod,.)

CONFIDENTIAL10

CONFIDENTIALC, Field Test No, 1280.

On 17 July 1958.a VX-filled E5 land mine was detonated on the CarrollIsland test site. The terrain was wet during the conduct of the test, andheavy dew and intermittent showers were experienced during the sampling period.Soil and surface samples were taken from rn area whose initial contaminationdensity, as determined from ground d36osition plots, was about 750 mg/sq m.The indicated rate of decay in contamination is represented by the followingresidual contamination densities rs determined by DB3 analysis of samples takenone hour, one day, end four days after burst, respectively: From 1/2-in. deepsoil plugs, 143, 25 and 10 mg/sq m; and for surface samples, 155, 25 and 0mg/sq M.

D. Test Plan No. 29,

in trials primariiy designed to establish the relative transferabilityof agent and simulant from the ground to clothing, a test site on Graces Quarterswith a moderately dense coverage of grass about .3 inches tall was uniformlycontaminated with VX in densities ranging from about 1 to 14 g/sq m. On 30 July1958 the agent was dispersed from the aultijet disperser as shattered droplets(about 500 microns); and on 12 August as free falling droplets (about 3,000microns). Within an hour after the dispersion of agent, blotting-type surfacesamples -ere taken from each test area. On the following two days, the presenceof residual toxic agent was determined by surface samplers and exposed rabbits.The persistency of active ageit on grass-covered terrain during warm, moderetely-wetweather is indicated in the following table:

CONFIDENTIAL11ii

WJz -4,

N N Iq Iq !, I q ! I

~1 00.0

0"710 0 dai-I

.sJ 0

'$$ 4 4-

a q q 'A V~, M $. o oo4 o p

0 0-4.9.

P-4 H_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

ogo

000

01 .a4.-4 0 2~

C.d

~ IIDP0

4.)' 4.)

m~~ Iq 0 o M04 . -

02 ~~~ ~ ~- C-N - ui) -40

4- rv en t 'o t- t 0, 0 0

1-4

~12

CON IIDENT A I

V. (C) DISCUSSION.

By detinition*, persistency is "an exnression of the duration of effective-ness of a war gas which is dependent on .hysical and chemical oroperties of thegas, weather, methods of dissemination, and condition of terrain." Therefore,the results presented in this report must be interpreted in terms of effective-ness, rather than in consideration of wh~ther or not the presence of residualagent in the ground remains detectable by chemical annlysis of soil extrpctions.Thus, despite the presence of detectable quantities of active agent in the top1/2-inch layer of terrain for weeks after the dispersion of V-agent, the persis-tency of the agent as determined by animal exposure nnd surface sampling iseffectively only a matter of days.

If animal data can be assumed indicative of occupational hazard (ie, hazardincident to sitting or lying down in the area for several hours without benefitof protective equimont), the duration of such hazard could be exnected fromiless than one day to several days, depending upon the density of contamination.For densities below 2.5 -g/sq m, no alpreciable number of fatalities might beexpected to result from Dercutaneous effects suffered by troops entering andoccupying the area in somewhat less than 24 hours following contamination. Forhigh densities (10 to 30 g/sq m), the area might be safe for occupation sometimeafter two days, but lees than a week following contamination. The results ofanimal exnosure also indicate that the persistence of V-agent in dry sand isgreater than in soil or grass sod. This fact almost appears to be a paradoxin light of "soil-plug" results which indicate that residual agent can beextracted from the top 1/2-in, layer of soil for a longer period of time thanfrom ths top 1/2-in. layer of sand. This condition can be attributed todifferences in physical properties of the two media.

The pick-up of agent on blotting-type surface Pamplers supported animaldata by revealing the rapidity with which transferable surface contaminationdeclined. The average quantities of agent available for transfer to surfacesamplers one hour and ona day after the dissemination of VX were approximately20% and 1% of the initial contamination density, resoectively. This fact wascorroborated in OWL Technical Memorandum 33-19, dated 10 February 1959, coveringPhase B (Pick-Up) of the CWL Traversal Program. In that memorandum it wasestimated that for terrain with a moderately-dense covering of short grass,troops crawling over the area one hour after the dissemination of agent wouldpick up about 20 times an much agent as would troops traversing the area one daylater.

Surface-sampler data also provided v, basis for estimating the duration ofeffectiveness of the disseminated agent to serve ai a traversal hazard topersonnel walkin,- across contiminated areas. Since the pad of the sampler waspressed against the surface at the same oressure as that exerted by the sole of

'TM 3-215, Military Chemistry end Chemical Agents, August 1956.

CONFIDENTIAL

13

CONFIDENTIALa man's shoe when all his weight is on one foot as in walking, and since thepad is more absorbent than a shoe, the quantity of agent picked up per unitarea of the pad should be in excess of that which could be picked up on theshoe. However, even if it were assumed that the pick-up on the pad representedthe maximum quantity of agent that could be picked up on the shoe with eachstep, the hazard due to ngent penetrating the Cootwetir of porsonnel traversingcontaminated areas with no or lov vegetation (is, 0 to 4-in. grass) would benil or of very short duration. This assumption was predicated on a roughestimate which indicated that the maximum quantity of agent that could bepicked up on each shoe of troops walking across 100 meters of terrain is numeri-cally equal to 1-1/2 times the residual contaminRtion density as determined bythe surface samplers, or about 30% and 1-1/2% of the initial contaminationdensity when the traversal is effected one hour and one day, respectively,after the dissemination of the contaminant. Thus, for example, if agent weredeposited in a density of 1 g/sq m, the maximum pick-up might be 0.3 g on eachshoe of troops walking across 100 meters of cont-minated terrain ithin an hou-after the dispersion of agent, and only 0.015 g when such traversal is effectedone day later. These estimated quantities viere based on the added facts that(1) each shoe contacts the ground 75 times in the 100-meter travereal, (2) thecontact area of the shoe is about 0.02 sq m, and (3) the average quantitids ofagent transferable to surface samplers one hour and one day after the disoersionof V-agent are, as indicated above, about 20% and 1% of the initial contaminntiondensity, respectively. (NTOTE: The effects of toxic vapors emanating from contamina-ted terrain were omitted from this discussion of traversal hazard. The evaoora-tion rate and dosage production of VX from contaminated terrain is the subject ofa special study currently in progress.)

ACKNOWLEDMOT

The author wishes to express his appreciation and gratefully acktv.ledgethe efforts of Mr. Albert Deiner, Chemical Test Branch, Test Division, indirecting both the field and laboratory work associated with this phase of theOWL Traversal Program.

CONFIDENTIAL14

CONFIDENTIAL

APPEMDIX A

TABULATED DATA

Table 1 Contamination of Soil ........... 16

Table 2 Conaminatlion of Sand. . . . . . . . 17

Table 3 Contamination of Grass Sod . . ... 18

Table 4 Summary of Rabbit-Mortality Data . . 19

CONFIDENTIAL15

SA'r Cont-~ilnation fA hcIt zholnqEIrM'9e Mn09ti'--o1,ical Condjt1'onsDate *.ta i',ia t n i~iiy "rto I i ty in ~r-.Iv 'rs ___ Iiicatqd U.round Tap Av. Air ~PaiiliY57 dsl.m /vh/;T)-i

3112 O ir .v3 112 0.c.1)113 0/ 55 -64

3/1

V57 1~~ p~

3/)3

L/17

3170 1., -J.'7

4/8/ -- - - -- --.

211 0.]L350

3/201 2.'

118 1.y,

1/2L 15~

17.

4/8 0.10.

11 0.2

4/L i .?

2/?/1 LTC.11.7

L/2? 74/23 3L 1/5 J701

5-60 0.1

5/2n noV?5 ~

/Moo elqelluA V 1,0, a L,

5/7

5/2

7/2 -t

* /70

IL,

5?

> /C,. 7 ,

5/2.') 7,, - " .C -- .

7 7/3 n -7.I

/14 2")

2/ -• 0.6

,13. 7 . ._7'/2 ,8,.-

2) 1.

/23 1.IS V .. .. I

5 2

>/IDl "' . : ,,. '> '._3

.t21 C. 1n:1,'

---- --. - - --

i-/ I o/ 30 -- ?,- ".3,

/98

?/21 76 0.,'7 0/"5-0-

/7 903

/25 2 . i

-3.

/123 .I l .3i27 7-8, 07 0.1.

3lt r,'' o.672 6:, o. o.

,I1 25 "'.*'.''

In 77 7 ' "/r :.l 90

25 1: ' o 9

9

/12 -s 7-5- 0.1

-1 - --- --- -- -

/ 73 ,- t

/7 .57580o

1C ,.i.. '/.7 6* .0

/25 : 0.L" l •

-

22 L ,o

/7 . .;7 -..

2$ c . 'I- -' "- '

1] - " " ,7/.9 6

121,?i .,'- . T ,

/ Adoo elq e! ^y as,

7/ ] ,

t/:

/37

1 //,.- .- ,.

/27 7

/1 7 .

IIL•'.

'?2 :2 (

32 3 t

'/7 1:. 0. :t

/2 2 -12 ?1 12 ...

4 / 8 o8o

/ c'. o- .6

'16 1:4 2 7 - 30/2? 2 o 2.0./23 03 .3

12., r~ o3/2 a ,.2) / -. 6.7' ").06

I/3 . /2 i5 - Tc 0.80 ~ . 0.6

8 o.6~' 7 1/2 5 ,A

23 21. 0.327 i5 0.1

0.6

i! 7, ?1 2 Y6 /

i. 0} .0!

7 7 .9 1.2 12 06

7 13 ..

2.0

23 14 0.327 19 0.1.3> 2 .0.6

2 .1t

/9 2c . 3 7/2 - - 61L 0.3' . 0/? I'tO - '7i

'27 iS, 4 0.3

1 ois o. 5

2 0.350 .10 2/: 35"

22 13 o 80o/23 ii, 0o3

* 3 25 jl 0.67 2) ------- - - --

U -:: . ""-

Adocj 91qr3BI AV s

I: at .- nn i t A.. .

_______a___ea rt. 1.,t-4

.1,4~- it. i i

Di i... -, r--. ---. -o r.--

D! v -T !-- I 'i r'"add'x -- ot2

17/

Secd SiMif /1 0j

%(1

/12 141

Initial 3/16i~ uain 2124 0 U 1 "r

Disperaa rs Miacrotit-rette 3/20 iI*2s-hade' loIt V/2i

7 47L (4

L/4 17

I Initl, Cxntaiations l. 2..~.' L3t 0 3,2 2?Parie Szat 7 , 4A1 1 .b?-Disperstr Spinningtt 3Tip 2-L5z~dcd Plot 3/5 37 1.07

21 i / ,

Initial Contamjnations .~- .1

Adoo appqpAV IsGE3

ni t LaICit a iu 4ia z~ d. in -- -- -- -- - - ------

* ?irti2>1 LZI. - - A;4 I

Shad~ed Fil. .

'7/j

01/2,5

Inioa Gita fati..3 % .. q'. ,l7rPart.cla Sizal 4200j, /

I: Dispersr: Spinn'ing 7ipShaded Flot /27 7 7

rI)

C,/ 22

Sit j Plt/?? 0-

ShadedPlot.6/2) 25.L7/3 38

7/22 48

7/23 '?

IDii. Ipcr a inir. .i -/10 o. I I ?

Shadad Plot 612/l 1;

7/8~7/:2 1.2

7/" 7 7.

7/") L)

DsesrSpI 2?,,Tr)

rtt.! 7

77

77 /

/7

Iitil[ C.1l&,1flt ti fl AXO ." ./3';.n. /,, ..

7/ 7 .

7;,o71 L1.7

7/'6 7

7/22 2b

7/237/,' 3

7/2., 27 .8/32

7 /7 .06

Inital I t'intiont !.5 7/ , . / -.Particle Size: ?22p 7/3 1 ! ./2 "Dispzrr.ti pinning Ti 7/8

7 'x 7

7/1 o. *7,/? - 0

* 7/23 21

7177/77

12, 27 0.03

8/3 3

0/7 36 %.0"

, Initial '7ontac.nt-ioni .5 .5;.n. 7/? 1 .;i2 112Particle Size. 22 71/3 1 ).73 /2Disr.emer: Spinine Tip 7/8 0 1

7/1n 7 ').0-7/22 1! 0.11

7 i/7 1

Initial. 7/j 0 .1, 1/2 -Particle 6i4z-e Z ,4 7/3 A73 1./?Dispsrrerri Siin; Tip 7/1: 0.127/16 7 O!.q2:

7/22. 13l7/2 37 0.

7/27 318.O

Initial Contamination; 0.6 ~~q 7/) %" 6.212 0Prti.le Sizat 22) 7Z,*/10 1 o.5 70 /? "A

iapervero S;in Ti 7/11 7' 0.08

7/22 13 O.Ii

7./23 !h

71/_7 2__7/29 20 10.5

0 1 8/3 25

7: 27 o ./?6

7/2 i3L

dOON

1.-. C m- N D

00

1., 000

C', C ,

-I"

.4 40

vo V V

CV~ *1 So

CY I 0 N

Ch S0 00 coc ")0 00

.(.1000 0*. So IA m 400C, 0 . C; co

@%.N, .-I %,r- ., C,'O 4 OS cSvo S~ 0 4 -7 .- 40

0 -0 D* * * 0 t* *

.ind',%A~b 5)OrS 00 N-IE~000 U3S'000 C MY00

* S Lo 0

.a.',stAatbl" o

j-cr 00 04 *00

101 ACI

aq C) c ' 0C 0

C 0 v

--- ~j H i {1 I H ~c

0 14C. f, r'to ; C) ) 4 I C 401 Y 4 C

a '---' 0 t.c COOA 4 o r0C.C 00 OCO ('00 NC

00,

0 qC)4

it~- ft C3 t

Avial r-,o ,4n

in i Ii

10 -*ui -0um0

'0 A 0 10

tt It 101 1*~ .g

!-4 5-

*1 *

.-4.

~~~~9 4o . ~~

.0 0 0 . N 0 - NO - Nz0- N 0 - N I C . N 0 - N ~ 0 4 t

., 4,

Best Avilbl CO-

i !11!1

T T

13 _Q14P C

x4 14 x Nw0K0H DM1IwYCN; H "I C mo'xOM CO V

IZ'

I M-I TI' t It a

- oulF

__~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Bs Avi.al Copy--,---.- -..---- *--~-~-- .----

I CONFIDENTIAL

I

APPRIDIX B

GRAPHS

Fig. . Contamination of Soil. . . . • 21

Fig. 2 Contamination of Soil. . . . . 22

Fig. 3 Contpmination of Sand. . . . . 23

CONFIDENTIAL20

n. -D 2~C .. ,a.co

CO JF!DENTII.A .. _-

~~777T~W -~ 1~I ~~

I___ 7" 225A ~:

--- a i.' --- m.. ... "

F7,

• - -: --------L

T, .. .. ... .. . .. . 1]. _ ! ...4 ..... I ... .... .... . t.. -'*'rall G -I/ Y . !7 /2 . j.. -6jlO . . j2.: +.(IL

_ _ ,___ _ t L ..

ae, I - --U 56 6

T! "~t S 'md

. ...Da~ _ _ .. . ... 9 ... . .... , . .... .. ...

_- -

___ __ ~ - Sha&&--- -- -

It-

est Ava .ble Copy

1 .7

V.Partiole~st ; L40

-

0 -I

Ir~., Ca~ an -:-: .2__ Il' a40 1 4U

Toot P'2bt cpXQ.p.

- 1.7

v7-I4IH __ ~7Best

RoadI Oi m1 n a~ni. Nns ty (g. g .aJ M ArzTm da..)

o a-

C .

--- -- ~- r - ~i - --- A

-- J ---. -

____cl S; _____300__O

01" _ 1 l*O. ___~

Test Ptmae

-L--

K L.------ .y C5,V

, .r.{ .l S- 22, 4

AL

APPENDIX C

PHOTOGRAkPHS

Fig. 1 Arrangement of Test Plots 25 ..

Fig. 2 Spinning Tip Apparatus * ... 26

244

2 1 3c 3 st Available Copy

(D 4-3

t o 4 3 5-i

~: .-4

5:14I

434

0'

a -, B s t A v il a b l C o p

4.4

'4-

(D

0

26Bet vil21 CP

9/

APPDIX D

REPORTS

Report 1, Analysis of Crroll Island Terrein by Dept of

A (y i c u l t u r e . . . . . . . . . .. ... 2 8

est Available Copy

27

0PY Soil Survey Laboratory

Plant Industry StationBeltsville, MarylandFebruary 7, 1958

Mr. Abruham KoblinTest Division CWLArmy Chemical CenterEdgewood, Maryland

Dear Mr. Koblin:

Work has been completed on the two samples that youleft with us.

The soil samples from the covered and uncovered plotsare nearly identical with respect to particle sizedistribution and chemical properties. The clay contentis low, averaging only 5.2%. !owever, the exchangecaoacity per unit clay is fairly high, averaging 150m q/lGO g clay. The percentage exchangeable sodium ishigh, averaging 23.1 percent. The conductivity measurementsindicate the equivalent of approximately 3 meq/liter ofNaCI in the saturation extrac-. Although this is nothigh enough to be considered a saline soil, this is higherthan normal for soils of the area. The high sodium contentis undoubtedly due to proximity of the site to ChesapeakeBay.

Tha clay contains vermiculite, illite, some mixed-layermnersl intermediate between illiLf and vermiculate, andtraces of kaolin. No moutmorillonite is present. Thereis also a component which gives a fairlg strong exothermicreaction in Differential, Thermal at 520 analyses, whichhas not been identified thus far.

Sincer'iy yours,

Lyle T. Alexander

Chief, Soil Survey Laboratory

Enclosure

C0

PY

28. Best Available Copy