.- . 
WT-954 

OPERATION CASTLE-PROJECT 2.7a 

Report to the Scientific Director 

RADIOACTIVITY OF OPEN-SEA PLANKTON SAMPLES 

T. R. Folsom 

F . D. Jennings 

M. W . Johnson 

University of California 

Scripps Institution of Oceanography 

LaJolla, California 

ABSTRACT 

Project 2.7a was sn outgrowth of Project 2.7, the genesis of which is described in the 

Project 2.7 report, Reference 1. During the 2.7 surveys, samples of marine organisms 

of the deep sea were collected by Scripps Institution of Oceanography (MO) and were later 

analyzed by SIO and the U. 5. Naval Radiological Defense Laboratory (NRDL). 

It was the objective of Castle 2.7a to ascertain and to report on the general relationship pertinent to the uptake of fission products by the marine organisms collected during 

the 2.7 survey in order to form a background for more extensive tests on Operation 

Wigwam. Gross beta activities, beta absorption curves and gamma spectra were analyzed, 

after identification of the organisms. A radiochemical analysis wss performed by NRDL. 

It was found: (1) that marine organisms concentrate activity from fallout fission products in the water by factors of the order of 1,000, (2) that the partition of fallout fission 

products in the ocean is profoundly influenced by biological processes and that a purely 

physical model is inadequate to predict distribution, (3) that the feeding mechanism of 

the organism does not clearly determine the amount of activity assimilated, (4) that there 

is evidence of fractionation of isotopes by different organisms, and (5) that there is some 

evidence that finely dispersed activity is retained more or less proportionally with the 

dry weight of the organism. 

5 
PREFACE 

Much time has passed since the Castle Operation when the effects of fallout upon the open 

sea were first studied by oceanographic methods. More recent field tests have contributed 

far more data concerning the radioactive contamination of marine organisms than could be 

collected during the hastily outfitted cruise of the U. S.S. SIOUX following Castle, Shot 5. 

Nevertheless the two small samples of plankton that were collected by the SIOUX were 

sufficiently impressive to influence the thinking of people making preparations for later 

operations, and, in particular, the thinking of people involved in the problem of oceanic 

disposal of atomic wastes. 

Today these specimens themselves do not appear so spectacular, nor have some of 

the hypotheses that guided their analyses been completely substantiated. 

It is now common knowledge that marine organisms are notorious concentrators of 

radioactive debris from nuclear detonation; and biologists, radiochemists and oceanographers 

have acquired enough interest and experience to carry out well-organized and integrated 

research on the problems. For these reasons the original interim report has been rewritten and some of the conclusions have been left out. Critical original experimental 

data from field expeditions retains its value almost indefinitely, however, and this paper 

reports the first direct in situ evidence of the profound influence of deep sea organisms 

on the partition of radioactive debris from atomic weapona, and directly demonstrates the 

inadequacy of a model that accommodates only the physical processes of mixing, advection, 

etc. This fact justifies a final report. 

The authors wish to point out that proper credit has not yet been directed to certain 

people who were largely responsible for the original conception of the expedition and 

outfitting of it so that it could be successful. It was Professor John D. Isaac6 who, in 

fact, proposed that plankton samples be taken and who located and acquired the special 

net that was needed, as well as the other oceanographic gear, and it was to a great degree 

the scientific and administrative experience of Professor Isaaca and of Dr. Edward Martell 

that pulled the project together as an operational unit. 

It is almost impossible to be sure that proper credit is given to everyone who contributed to this special aspect of the Castle project. The radioanalyses of Table 2 were 

done at NRDL by Doctors R. W. Rinehart, J. A. Seiler, W. H. Shipman, and others and 

the data transmitted to SIO by Dr. L. B. Werner with valuable comments. 

Dr. Edward D. Goldberg was responsible for the beta and gamma measurements 

shown on Table 1 and Figures 1, 2, and 3; the beta analyses were carried out at SIO but 

the gamma spectra were measured at NRDL. 

Dr. Martell reviewed the preliminary report and demonstrated that these early, scanty, 

experimental findings could hardly justify the conclusions expressed. The authors concurred and the report has been revised extensively. 

6 
CONTENTS 

5 

6 

9 

PROCEDURE --_-_-_- ____________________~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 9

Objectives of the Laboratory Studies _-__________________~~~~~~~~ 9 

General Character of Biological Samples -------------------------- 9 

ClassificationofOrg~s~___--________-___-______---________ 10 

Characteristics of the Sea Water Masses Involved - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 10 

10 

Gross BetaActivity Measurements __-----_-------_-_-_---------_ 10 

BetaAbsorptionAndyses -_-_________________~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 10 

Beta~cayCh~~~r~sti~s----------------------------------- 10 

G~~Spe~tra----------------------------~~~~~~~-~~~~~~~ 10 

F&&o&e&&Analyses _-__________________~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 11 

State 14 and Size of Fission Particles in Sea Water ---------------------

15 

17 

18 

FIGURES 

1 Beta-absorptioncurve ~--~~~--~--~~-----~~‘---‘-‘_---~~~~-~~~~~~~ 11 

2 Beta decay curves --__________________~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~-~~ 12 

3 Gammaenergy spectra------------------------------------ 13 

TABLES 

1 Beta Activities of Organisms from Castle ____________________--- 14 

2 ~~y~~~~~~~p~~~~~~~----~----~-~~-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ l5

3 The Physical State of Fission Prod& Elements in Sea Water Following

anUnderwaterVaporation_-------------------------- 16 

7-8 
. 

, 
RADIOACTIVITY OF OPEN-SEA PLANKTON SAMPLES 

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES 

Immediately following Shot 5 of Operation Castle in 1954 the Fleet Tug U.S. S. SIOUX 

manned by scientific personnel from NRDL and the Scripps Institution of Oceanography 

made a four-day long cruise through the oceanic area adjacent to Bikini. The extensive 

measurements of the pattern of gamma activity in the sea water were made and are the 

subject of a comprehensive report, Reference 1; and during the cruise, at two different 

stations, a net was lowered and a sample of the zooplankton population was taken. These 

zooplankton samples exhibited an intense concentration of gamma activity over that of the 

surrounding water. This was immediately apparent from the effect that their presence in 

the specimen jars had upon a portable gamma indicator, in spite of relatively high baokground aboard the ship. 

The two bottles of plankton were immediately sent to NRDL and SIO for classification 

and analysis by biologists and radiochemists. The outcome is the subject of this report. 

PROCEDURE 

The samples were collected with a standard silk zooplankton net, having a diameter 

of one meter, using the technique customary in biological oceanography. The net was 

lowered into the water at 50 meters per minute until 200 meters of wire had run out. The 

wire was then hauled in at 20 meters per minute. This technique collects the organisms 

from roughly 500 cubic meters of water, including all depths between 0 and about 140 

meters. 

The samples were received at SIO about one week after collection and were then 

further preserved with formalin; most of the organisms were in good condition. Biological 

identification of the organisms was made at SIO. 

Objectives of the Laboratory Studies. How fission products are distributed in the 

ocean after a fallout is of importance to those planning weapons tests and disposal of 

atomic wastes at sea. The distribution within the marine biosphere is of special importance, because (1) certain marine zooplankton are known to migrate vertically and therefore could be significant vectors of fallout activity through the stable layers where water 

transport is much reduced; (2) the activity in organisms is in a critical material, potential 

foodstuffs. Among other things, it was decided to investigate the possibility that an 

organism’s activity was influenced by its feeding habits. 

General Character of Biological Samples. Nets of the type used, pass most of the 

phytoplankton and very smallest zooplankters. Most of what is caught is of visible size. 

Many of the small animals display their ability for movement by darting about the collection jar. Certain large transparent passive gellatenous animals can be seen to contain 

smaller organisms, alive or dead. Since it is known that zooplankton depend ultimately 

9 
upon the minute primary plants of the sea, it is certain that any catch of zooplankton must 

include also whatever phytoplankton exist as undigested fodder. 

Classification of Org recognize amongst the 

zooplankton several characteristic modes of acquiring food, and it was found possible to 

separate the Castle catch into three sorts. The resulting splits admittedly were small, 

but this was all that the catch afforded. 

The classifications generally used by biologists are as follow: 

(S) Setal; feeding with the aid of protruding bristles (setae), 

(R) Rapacious; seizing food agressively, and 

(T) Tentacular; gathering food by means of tentacles. 

Characteristics of the Sea Water Masses Involved. Although the two samples were 

collected many miles apart, there is oceanographic evidence that the samples came from 

similar water masses in the sense that no differences in the type of zooplankton might be 

expected. However, it has been estimated that fallout arrived at Station 6 when this water 

was about 180 miles from the shot center, whereas the fallout arrived at Station 8 when 

this water lay about 80 miles from ground zero. Thus the fallout particles at Station 6 

likely were finer than those at Station 8. Both points lay more or less along the axis of 

the computed fallout pattern, Reference 1. 

The gamma intensity measured by a Geiger detector (submerged but near the surface) 

at Station Y - 8 was roughly 10 times as high as the intensity similarly measured at 

Station Y - 6. These and other measurements indicate that the Sample Y - 8 came from 

water about 10 times more active than the Sample Y - 6. 

There is oceanographic evidence that substantially only Shot 5 contributed to the contamination of the waters from which each sample was taken. 

RESULTS 

Gross Beta Activity Measurements. Gross beta activities of each type of feeder are 

compared in Table 1. An end-window Geiger-Muller counter having a window thickness 

of 1.4 mg/cm2 was used. The organisms vary widely in size and in weight so that activity 

has been expressed in Table 1 in terms of wet weight as well as in terms of dry weight 

of organism. 

Beta Absorption Analyses. Figure 1 compares the activities from three feeding types 

in terms of attenuation caused by aluminum filters interposed in front of the counter. A 

setal feeder and a rapacious feeder were studied as well as samples of fish larvae whose 

feeding habit was not classified. The types are identified in Table 1. 

Beta Decay Characteristics. Figure 2 compares the decay of beta activities in four 

kinds of plankton; the curves were not normalized in percent of initial activity because 

their slopes are very similar and their superimposition would cause a confusing graphical 

picture. 

Gamma Spectra. The gamma spectra of three selected plankton were obtained in the 

7O-channel gamma pulse analyser of NRDL and two are shown in Figure 3 along with the 

instrumental background spectrum. It will be noted in Table 1 that both organisms are 
I Herbivorous Copepods 

Abscwber Thickness, mg/cm’ of Aluminum 

Figure 1 Beta-absorption curve. 

of the setsl feeding type. The third biological aample consisting of rapacious copepods 

produced a spectrum indistinguishable from background. 

Radiochemical Analyses. Table 2 lists the results of the radiochemical analyses 

carried out at NRDL (Reference 2), and displays certain individual activities in terms of 

11 
-

Days After Detonation 

Figure 2 Beta decay curves. 

certain activity totals. This tabulation also is the result of the initial interest in the 

matter of how the various nuclides are distributed in sea water containing plankton. 

The total weights and volumes of the portion of the haul analyzed here was not 

reported but they were contained in epecimen bottles holding about 200 ml water with 

plankton that, it ie believed, would have a “drained volume” of about 1 to 2 ml. Therefore in Table 2 the total activity per ml volume is of the order of 1,000 times higher in 

12 
I 

EUPHAUSIID 

SMLOWEIRON 

Photon Energy in mev 

Figure 3 Gamma energy spectra 

the solid fraction (drained zooplankton) than in the filtrate. More details are given in 

Table 2 which lists the ratio of the specific activity of each fraction of the organic material 

to that of the supernatent liquor. 

The analyses of sea water samples taken in this area are still considered classified 

data and cannot be discussed here in such a way as tc give more information concerning 

the concentrating ability of plankton to fallout materials. Furthermore, the analysis of 

13 
- - 

- - 

- - 

the samples of water taken in this area was reported in terms of gamma activity making 

valid comparisons with Table 2 difficult. 

Table 2 compares the compositions of the radioactivity retained by two species of 

marine organisms that were selected from the’solid fraction mentioned in Table 2. Even 

from the meager data shown here, it can be seen that there are significant variations in 

the amounts and kinds of activity retained. 

State and Size of Fission Particles in Sea Water. Table 3 is taken from earlier 

laboratory experiments at NRDL by Greendale and Ballou (Reference 3) where fission 

products were vaporized in sea water. The four nuclides listed display some tendency to 

TABLE 1 BETA AC TIVITIES OF ORGANlSMS FROM CASTLE* 

S - Setal feeders. R - RqacIous feeders. T - Tentacular feederr, Parena - Estimated values. 

Activity Aotlvity Acflvityt Feeding TOtd wet WY e;lmp’e Tvpe Ol-grni8Ul No. Per c/mln/gm c/mln/gm Activity Weight OrgUlbWU we’gbt wet weigbt Dry Weight 

c/min w mg 

Y-6 S Herbivorous copqods 10 9,119 920 24.9 1.6 3.7 x 10‘ 6.1 x ld 

conected (CalanUS) adult 

1500 S Herbivorous mixed 21 4,465 214 (76.0) 4.5 0.60 0.99 

9-y CalPnoid copepods 

1954 S Stylocheiron (Euphausild) 10 6,143 614 17.9 2.1 3.4 2.9 

R Rnpaclous copepods adult 10 5,269 526 16.9 1.2 3.3 4.4 

R Rapacious copepods 10 2,966 297 8.6 1.5 3.3 2.0 

R SagMa 12 - 16 mm 10 6.127 613 16.6 3.1 3.6 2.0 

R Segitta 10 - 12 mm 10 3,246 325 9.6 1.3 3.3 2.5 

T Slphonophore piece 1 245 245 3.2 0.2 0.77 1.2 

Lucifer 7 mm 4 1,474 369 6.3 0.2 4.6 1.4 

Fish Larva 1 1,256 1,256 4.0 1.1 3.2 1.1 

Polychaete fragment 2,272 2,272 6.3 1.1 3.6 2.1 -

(Syllid; 25 mm 

t Pieces of algal detritus 722 (6.0) 0.72 0.90 1.0 

Y-6 S Copepod.9. Pleuroma- 10 219 22 (3.5) 0.22 0.63 1.0 

Collected s ostracoda, small 6 1,122 140 (11) 1.1 1.0 1.0

2400 S copepGd.9. Pleuromamma 10 3,635 363 (61) 3.7 6.0 0.96 

1 may adult 

1954 S Euphausiide. 3.9 mm 2 2,063 1,027 (20) 2.05 1.0 1.0 

R copepads. rapacioue 10 326 33 0.33 1.1 1.0 

R Sagitto 5 - 15 mm 10 460 45 (2.3) 0.45 2.0 1.0 

R Copepods. rapacious 10 537 54 (6~ 0.54 0 .so 1.0 

R 1 Phronima 7 mm and 2 235 116 0.2 1.2 1.2 

(3) 

(2) 

1 amphipcd 2 mm 

copepods. Corycaeus 25 223 9 (2.5) 0.22 0.90 1.0

Siphonophore pieces 340 (5.0~ 0.31 0.66 1.1 

Flocculent detritus 4,757 (501 4.6 0.95 1.0 

*Counta reduced to ttme of countrng. 22 May 1954. 

t Feeding type unknown. 

8 Efficiency of the Beta Counter wan about 14 percent. 

segregate between three states of dispersal; however, it must not be inferred from these 

laboratory data alone that in the case of fallout into the sea and in the presence of living 

organisms these elements would be permanently partitioned in the manner tabulated. 

Moreover, a living organism might possess an affinity for activity in quite a different 

kind and degree than would the same organism dead. 

i 

Table 3 does not indicate the physical state of barium, but from its chemical and 

14 
- -- --- 

physical properties one would expect it to behave much like strontium and some indication 

of this is shown in Table 2. 

It is known that the size of fallout particles are related to the distance from the 

explosion at which the fallout occurs; and that the mean particle size in general decreases 

as distance increases. It is most likely therefore that the particles arriving at Station Y - 8 

(80 miles from ground zero) were larger than those arriving at Station Y - 6 (180 miles 

from ground zero at the time of arrival). However, no direct measurements were made, 

and numerical estimates of particle size require extensive qualification beyond the scope 

and classification of this paper. 

DISC USSICN 

In Table 1 it will be noted that each of the classes as well as each type of organism 

in Sample Y - 6 shows the remarkably similar specific activity when referred to dry 

TABLE 2 ANALYSIS AND COMPARISONS 

Earths S&,0 Bu’6’,‘0” FlXCtiCll Gross Activity Rare BB’M ZI= ~b’” Undetermined 

Radiochemical Analysts of Separated Fraction8 of Samples Y - 6. c/min of Beta activity 

Water* 62,500 3,530 1,780 1,600 690 640 33,900 39,960 

(4101$ (6)t (4.5)l 

Solid Fraction 1 320,000 91,000 640 60 69,300 29,000 74,000 49.980 

(320,000)$ @O)S (69.OOOrt 

Total 402,500 100,530 2,420 1,680 70,190 29,640 107.900 69,940 

Percent of Total Activity Contributed by Separated Fractions of Sample Y - 6 

Water 20.5 0.66 0.44 0.40 0.22 0.21 0.43 9.92 

Solld Fraction 79.5 24.1 0.16 0.02 17.2 7.20 16.4 12.42 

Apparent Specific Concentration Factors of Organic Material Over Supernatent Water, 

(c/min/gm)/(c/min/gm) 

780 5.500 IO 10 16.000 6,900 440 -

Comparison of the Compositions of the Activity Retained in Two Selected Organisms from 

Sample Y - 9. (Activity given relative to total for each organism, in 

percent) 

Copepcds - (mixed) - 23.6 0.26 0.17 - - 75.7 

Sagitta (robusta) - 40.6 1.2 0.60 - - - 51.4 

* Filtered through sintered glass. 

7 Solid fraction retained by filter (mostly inorganic remains). 

f Approximate specific activity c/min/gm; 1. e. assuming 200 ml supernatent and 1 gram wet 

plankton in the specimen. 

weight (Column 10); whereas no comparable consistancy appears in the activities of the 

components of Sample Y - 8. This inconsistancy possibly is related to the difference in 

size of the fallout particles at the two ranges. 

Because of the large variation in size, and presumably therefore also in food consumption, it is unconvincing to compare activities of individuals of quite different sizes. 

Amongst the poesible reference parameters in the data, dry weight would appear to offer 

the best reference for such comparisons as are being made here. However, it is possible 

that organisms may share activities in the preserving bottle, and if this were true, dried 

specimens having properties quite different in life might appear the same in the dry weight 

basis. This type of sharing is, of course, no less interesting but obscures the vital 

effects. There appears no way to avoid this difficulty entirely unless biological classifi16 
cations were carried out immediately. Experience shows that this is impractical on 

board ship. It ie difficult, however, to visualize the sharing process restricted to one 

sample and not the other, and, in addition, extremely difficult to conceive of a mechanism 

that controls the sharing on a dry weight basis, rather than on wet weight, total surface 

or some other parameter. The remarkably consietant results of activity on a dry weight 

basis, of one sample, leads one to suspect that the uptake and retention of radionuclides 

from fine fallout is directly related to the anhydrous weight of the organism throughout a 

wide range of water content. 

Certain of the Y - 8 zooplankton types are roughly 5 times as active, specifically, as 

are similar organisms in the Y - 6 catch. Increase of this sort could have been expected 

since the Y - 8 water mass was found by field gamma measurements to have been (ReferTABLE 3 TIiE PHYSICAL STATE OF FISSION PRODUCT ELEMENTS 

IN SEA WATER FOLLOWING AN UNDERWATER 

VAPORIZATION (From Reference 2) 

Physical State Element 

Ionic Colloidal Partfculate 

pet pet pet 

Sr 65 5 10 

ZI- 1 3 96 

Nb 0 0 100 

Ru 0 5 95 

Ce 1 4 96 

ence 1) roughly ten times more radioactive than the Y - 6 and also because the Y - 8 

organisms were exposed roughly twice as long to the contaminated water as those of the 

Y - 6 samples. However, there is no exact proportion exhibited between resulting activity, 

and time multiplied by exposure activity; this too may be entirely the result of the presence 

of large particles in the Y - 8 water as discussed above. 

Table 2 illustrates again that radio nuclides of zirconium and niobium are likely to . be concentrated upon solid suspended particles especially on living organic materials. 

The same thing is seen on land where these particles collect on tree leaves and on carpet 

dust. No analyses were made during this early study of the sea water in these neighborhoods that would lead to an absolute estimate of the radiostrontium in the sea itself. Only 

gamma analyses were made of the water samples taken in this vicinity. Therefore it is 

not possible to estimate what affinity the organisms have toward strontium in comparison 

with any other radionuclides. 

Figure 3 illustrates that two different setal feeders, namely the herbivorous copepod 

and the euphausiid Stylocheiron, exhibit a different affinity for gamma emitters. The 

former show a strong spectral peak of energy between 0.49 Mev and 0.54 Mev, while the 

latter shows a broad peak between 0.65 Mev and 0.85 Mev. The sample of rapacious 

copepods showed no significant peak above background. Thus there is no apparent relationship between feeding method and activity whereas there ie an indication that two species 

within the setal feeding class behave quite differently regarding the kind of activity retained 

in a preserved sample. 

From F’igure 1 it csn be seen that the beta energies of a setal, rapacious and an 

unclassified type are similar whereas the ratios of the beta to gamma energies are somewhat different. The latter is the only strong correlation between feeding type and affinity 

to active material. 

The, curves of beta decay between 10 and 60 days shown in Figure 2 can ecarcely be 

16 
distinguished. The mean coefficients all lie between 1.6 and 1.9 and unclassified biological 

types vary more than do classified types. 

CONCLUSIONS 

Open-sea marine plankton can concentrate fallout activity strongly and therefore 

should be included in fallout transport considerations and in plans for disposal of atomic 

waste. This concentration is especially significant because it appears in an organic food. 

There is evidence from both beta and gamma analyses that certain plankton types 

have affinities for specific isotopes. 

The radioanalyses of the first two samples of contaminated oceanic zooplankton has 

not demonstrated that there exists a simple relationship between the affinity of a class 

of plankton toward radioactivity, and the size of food it apparently prefers to eat. There 

is more variability within the classes than between these classes. 

Oceanic zooplankton appear to be very effective concentrators of materials that are 

likely to be available in a particulate form, but they may concentrate certain other 

materials also, such as radiostrontium which is more likely to be in ionic form. 

There is some evidence that the retention of finely dispersed activity varies more 

or less proportionally with the organism’s dry weight over a considerable range in body 

size, surface area, and water content. 

17 
REFERENCES 

‘, - 1. Folsom, T. R. and Werner, L. B. ; “Distribution of Radioactive Fallout by Survey 

and Analysis of Contaminated Sea Water”; Project 2.7, Operation Castle, ITR-935, 

May 1954, Scripps Institution of Oceanography and U. S. Naval Radiological Defense Laboratory; Secret Restricted Data. 

2. Personal communication from Dr. L . B. Werner; U. 5. Naval Radiological Defense 

Laboratory, including assay report of R. W. Rinehart, NRDL file No. 3-935, RWR:Lad, 

15 July 1954. 

3. Greendale, A. E. and Ballou, N. E. ; 9hysical State of Fission Product Elements 

Following Their Vaporization in Distilled Water and Sea Water”; U. S. Naval Radiological 

Defense Laboratory No. 436. 

18 
DISTRIBUTION 

Military Distribution Categwy 5-50 

ARKX ACTIVIl'IE5 

1 Am.. asp. m0r 0r staff for ~ilit.9~ OperatIm, D/A, 

WaehI.n@on25, D.C. ATl’IV: Amt. Eracutive @8&W) 

1 Chief of Reesarch 8nd Dmalopnmnt, D/A, Washington 25, 

D.C. ATPIP: Atomic Dlvieicm 

1 Chief or Ordnmce, D/A, WashIn&m 25, D.C. AlTN: 

QRDTX-AN 

1 Chief Siepla1 Officer, D/A, P80 Mviaion, Waahingtm 

25, D.C. Am: SIGRD-8 

2 The SurSeon General, D/A, Washiwton 25, D.C. All'N: 

ImDNl2 Chief Chemical Officer, D/A, Waehington 25, D.C. 

1 zhs Qwrtemastar General, D/A, Waehington 25, D.C. 

ATTN: Reeearch nnd Developnant 

3 Chief of ~Inssre, D/A, Whehiwtcm 25, D.C. AlTN: . 

Elm-B 

1 Chief of Transportation, Military Pl..snnins md Intellinsnce Div.. Waehimtcm 25. D.C. 

3 co&m General, H&qua&m, u. s. Continental 

Aw Comand, Ft. Monroe, Ya. 

1 Pmeidant, Board #l, Headquartera, Continental Armr 

Command, Ft. Sill, Okls. 

1 Realdent, Board #2, Headqumtere, ContinentalAmy 

Connand, Ft. Wca, Ky.

1 Preeidsnt, Board #3, Headquartera, Continental Arnor 

Commd,Ft.Beminu, Ga. 

1 CommndinS General, Headquarters, Flret U. 9. Army, 

Governor's Inland, New York 4, N.Y. 

1 Conmandlng General, Headquarters, Second U. 9. Anqv, 

Ft. George G. Meade, Md. 

1 Comrmnding General, Headquartera, Third U. 9. Army, 

Ft. McPherson, Ga. ATTN: ACofS, G-3 

1 Commnding General, Hesdquarters, Fourth U. S. Army, 

Ft. Sam Houston, Tex. ATTN: G-3 Section 

1 Commanding General, Headquartera, Fifth U. S. Am, 

1660 E. &yds Park Blvd., Cbicwo 15. Ill. 

1 Commanding General, Headq~artere; S&h U. S. Army, 

Preeldio of San Francisco, San Francisco, Calif. 

All'N: AMGCT-4 

1 Ccmmnding General, U.S. Army Caribbenn, Ft. Anador, 

C.Z. ATl'N: Cml. Off. 

1 Cmmndiw General, UmARl' b MDPR, Ft. Brooke, 

Puerto Rico 

1 Ccmmmnding General, Southern Euro&mm l&k Force, 

AFU 168. New York, N.Y. ATl'N: ACofS. G-7 

1 Ccmmanding Gemre.1, Elshth U.S. Army, APU 301, San 

FIXIICI~CO,Calif. ATPN: ACofS, G-3 

1 CollmandLngGenersl, U.S. llrnor Alaska, APO 942, Seattle, 

Wash. --.. . 2 Commnding General, U.S. Am Europe, APO 403, New 

York, N.Y. A’iTA: OFVT Div.. Combat Dnv. Br. 

2 CormvrnhingGeneral, U.S. A& Pacific, AFQ 950, SM 

hanclsco, Calif. A'ITN: cml. off. 

1 Conrmandant,Command md General Staff College, Ft. 

Lsavenvorth, Km. AITN: ALLIS 

1 Commdant, The Artillery and Missile School, Ft. Sill, 

1 S.'E&, The U.S. Army Air Defense School Ft. 

Bliee, Texas. All'N: Maj. Ergan V. Roth, &pt. of 

Tactice and Combined Arnu 

1 ConmrrndingGeneral, A~Q Medical Service School, 

Brooke Army Msdioal Center, Ft. Sam Rouston, '&r. 

1 Dire&x-‘,Swcial Weawns Develommnt Office. 

Emdq&t&e, CONARC, Ft. BIIss,mTar. ATTN: 

Capt. T. E. Skinner 

1 Commdmt, WalterReed Am Institute of Research, 

Walter Reed Arw Medical Center, Washington 25, D. c. 

1 Superintendent,U.S. Military Aced-, West Point, N. Y. 

All%: Prof. of Ordnance 

1 Conmumdant, chemicalcorpa school, chemical corps 

Training Commend, Ft. McClellan, Ala. 

2 Commnding Demre.1, U.S. Army Chsmical Corps, Research 

and Dmelo&mmt Cammand. Waahinxton. D.C. 

2 Commding General, Aberdeen Proving &unds, Hd. 

All'N: Mrector, Balliatlca Research l&orators 1 Coumsnding General, The Engineer Center, Ft. Beivolr, 

Va. AT'IN: Asst. Cormandant. Et-mimer Schml 1 Commanding Officer, En&neer'R&&h and Development 

Laboratory, Ft. Belvolr, Pa. A'ITN: Chief, Technic& 

IntellISence Branch 

1 Comnmdlng Officer, PIcatInny Areeml, Dover, N.J. 

All'N: ORDBB-TK 1 Commmding Officer, Arw Medical Remarch Iaboratom._. Ft. Km;, Ky. - 2 Commndiog Officer, Chemical Warfare Labs., Amy 

Chemical Center. Md. ATl'N: Tech. LibI Comnmnding Officer, Trmeportation RW Station, Ft. 

Eustis, va. 

1 Director, Techn1c.s.l Documnts Center, Evans Signal 

Labor&xv. Belmar, N.J. 

1 Mrector, Armed Forces Institute of Pathology, Welter 

Reed Arnly Medical Center, 6825 l&h Street, N.W., 

Washington25, D.C. 

1 Operations Reeearch Office, Jobm lic~pkinaUniversity,

6935 ArlFngton Rd., Bethesda 14, Md. 

2 Commanding General, Qmrtermster Research and Development, Commend, Quartermaster Research and Develcguent 

Center, Natick, Mass. AlTN: CBR Liaison Officer 

1 Comandmt, The Army Aviation School, Fort Rucker, Ala. 1 President, Board No. 6. CONARC, Fort Rucker, Ala. 

1 Colnmandin# Caneral, Cmmtm-mster Reeearcb and 

Etmneeriw CQumaIld.U.S. Am. Natick. Mass. 

5 

NAVY ACTIVITIES 

2 Chief of h'wal Operations, Db, Washington25, D. C. 

A!lTN: OP-36 

2 Chief, Bureau of Medicim and Surgery, D/N, Wsehington 

25, D.C. AlTN: Special Wes~cme Dsfanee Mv. 

1 Chief of Nave.1 Personnel, D/N, Waah~~.@m 25, D.C. 1 Chief, Bursau of Shipa, D/N, Washington 25, D.C. ATTN: 

code 348 1 Chief, Bursau of Suppliee and Accounts, D/N, Washington 25, D.C. 2 ChlnP. Bure8u of Amonnutice, D/N, Waahiagton 25, D.C. 

i Commder-In-Chief, U.S. Atlantic Fleet, U.S. Naval 

Base, Norfolk ll, Va. 1 Comfmdant, U.S. Mtwine Corpe, WabhIn&n 25, D.C. 

ATlTI: Code AO3H 

1 Supsrintmdent, U.S. I&ml Postgraduate School, 

Monterey, CSllf. 1 Ccmmnding Officer, U.S. Nmal Schools Ccmmnd, U.S. 

N.sm1 Station, 'lhmmure Island, San hancisco, 

Calii. 

1 Ccmmmdin~ Officer, U.S. Fleet Tminin~ Center, Navml 

Base, Norfolk & Va. ATI’N: Special We.spom School 1 Comwmding Officm-, U.S. Fleet halning Contir, loaval 

Station. 9an Diego 36. Cslif. ATTN: (SAJP School) 

1 CclmmtvlinSOfficer, U.S. Naval Rue&@ ccmtm1 Truning

Canter, Naval Rem, phLbbalphia,Pa.A'lTN:AEG mreme Courss 

1 Coxmrmdrr, U.S. NswJ. Ordnance IsboreAcay, Silwr 

Spring 19, Md. AlTN: R 

19 
I 

1 Commander, U.S. Naval Ordnance Test Station, Qrmkern, 

ChIna me, Calif. 

1 Commnding Officer, U.S. Naval Medical Reeearch Inst., 

National Naval Medical Canter, Bethesda 14, Md. 

1 Director, The Material Iaboratory, New York Naval Shipyard, Brooklyn, N. Y. 

1 Commanding Officer and Director, U.S. Navy Electronics 

Labomtorp. San Diem 52. Calif. ATTN: Code 4223 

4 Commding i+fIcer, lJ:S.-N&al Radiological Dsfenia 

Iabomtoxy, San FrmcIeco, Calif. ATl?N: Technical 

Infornation Division 

1 Commander, U.S. Naval Air Developnt Center, Johnsville, Pa. 

1 Commanding Officer, Clothing Supply Office, Code lD-0, 

3rd Avenue and 29th St., Brooklyn, N.Y. 

1 Co-dmt, U.S. Cant Guard 1300 E. St. N.W., Washington 25, D.C. ATl'N: (OINj 

Comder-In-Chief Pacific, Pearl Harbor, TB 

: Technical Infolrmtion Service Ertension, Oak Ridge, Tam. 

(Surplus) 

AIR XQRCE ACTIVITIES 

1 Amt. for Atomic Energy Headquarters, USAF, Washington 25. D.C. ATTN: KS/O 

1 Directo;eof Operations, ii&quarters, USAF, Washington 

25, D.C. AlTN: 0pemt10ne Amlys1s 

1 Director of Plans, Headquarters, USAF, Washington 25, 

D.C. ATI'N: War Plans Div. 

1 Director of Research and Development, KS/D, Headquarters, USAF, Washington 25, D.C. Al-TN: Combat 

Components Div. 

2 Director of Intelligsnce, Headquartere, USAF, WaahFngton 25, D.C. AlTN: AFOIN-IB2 

1 The Surgson General, Headquarters, USAF, Washington 25, 

D.C. ATTN: Blo. Daf. Br., Pre. Med. Div. 

1 Aaat. Chief of Staff, Intelligence, Headquarters, U.S. 

Air Forma-Europe, APO 633, New York, N.Y. AlTN: 

Dimctomta of Air Tar&s 

1 Comnrmder, 497th Reconnaissance Technical Squadron 

(Awnted), AFQ 633, New York, N.Y. 

1 Conunder, Far East Air Forces, APO 925, San Francisco, 

Calif. AlTN: Special Asst. for Damage Control 

1 Comrender-in-Chief, Strategic Air Command, Off'utt Air 

Force Base, Omaha, Nebraska. AT'I1y: OAWS 

1 Conmumder, Tactical Air Comnrmd, Langley AFB, '?a. 

A'ITN: Documente Security Branch 

1 Omnrmder, Air Defense Commnd, tit AFB, Cola. 

2 Research Directorate, Headquarters, Air Force Special 

Weapons Center, girtland Air Force Base, New Merico, 

AlTN: Blast Effects Rea. 

1 Commander, Air Research and Developnent Camand, 

Andrevs AFB, WashFngton 25, D.C. 

1 Commander, Air Roving Ground Co-d, E&in AFB, Fla. 

ATIT?: Ml./Tech. Rewrt Branch 

Dlrectm, ii; Unlvereity Library, !&mm11 AFB, Ala. 

: Conrender, Flyins Training Air Force, R.andolph AFB, 

Ter. ATTN: Director of Observer Training 

1 Connnandar,Crew Training Air Force, Randolph Field, 

Tax. ATI'N: 2GTS, DcS/O 

2 Coumndmt, Air Force School of Aviation Medicins, 

md&ph AFB, Tar. 

2 Cmmndar, Wright Air Darslcqment Center, WrI@+ 

Patterson AFE, Dayton, 0. ATl'N: WCOSI 

2 ColaPander,Air Force Cambridge Reasarch Canter, Ic 

Hanscorn Field, Bedford, Mace. ATPN: CRQST-2 

3 Comder, Air Force SpecialWeapons Center, Kirtland 

AFB. N. Mm. ATTN: Librarv 

1 Cormaider, Lmxy AFB, Dar&, Cola. ATI'N: Impartmnt 

of SpecialWeaPone TraInInR 

1 Cornier, 1009th Special Weipone Squadron, Heed- , 

quarters, USAF, Washington 25, D.C. 

2 The PAN-D Corporation, 1700 Main street, Santa Monica, 

Calif. ATTN: Nuclear Energy Divieion 1 Commandor, Second Air Force, Barkedala AFB, Louisiana. 

AlTN: Operations Analyale Office 

1 Comrander. EIahth Air Force. Weetover AFB. f&me. ATTN: 

operations Analysie Off& 

1 Cormmder, Fifteenth Air Force, l&arch AFB, Calif. 

Al-TN: Operatime Analyeie Office 

1 Commander, Weetem Developmnt Div. (ARDZ), W Bar 262, 

Inglevood, CalIf. ATTN: WlXXT, Hr. R. G. Waltz 

5 Technical Informetion Service Erteneion, Oak Ridge, 

Term. (Surplus) 

O= DEPARTMKNT OF DEFENSE ACTIVITIES 

1 Asst. Secretary of Defame, Research and Engineering, 

D/D, Washington 25, D.C. ATTN: Tech. Library 

1 U.S. Documents Officer, Office of the U.S. National 

Military Representative, SHAPE, APO 55, New York, 

N.Y. 

1 Director, Weapons Systems Evaluation Croup, OSD, Rm 

2~1006, Pentagon, Washington 25, D.C. 

1 Cbaimm, Anned Services Fxploelvea Safety Board, D/D, 

Build- T-7, Gravelly Point, Washington 25, D.C. 

1 Comdant, Anmd Forces Staff College, Norfolk 11, 

Va. ATTN: Secretaly 

1 Commnder, Field Comxmd, Anmd Forces Special 

weapons Project, m Boz 51C0, Albuqusrqus, N. Mex. 

1 Commnder, Field Conmnd, Armed Forcee Spscial 

Weapons Reject, W Box 5100, Albuquerpue, N. Max. 

ATFN: TechnicalTraining Group 

5 Cmxmnder, Field Co-d, Amd Forces SpoIal 

Weepona PmJect, P.O. Box 5100, Albuquerque, 8. Max. 

ATTN: Deputy Chief of Staff, Wemp~nm Effeotm Teat 

11 Chief, Amed Forces Special Weapona Project, Washington 

25, D.C. ATTIP: Documenta Library Branch . 1 CmdIng General, MIlItmy Dietrict of Washington, 

Room 1543, Building T-7, Gravelly Point, Va. 

5 Tecimical Infornatim Service Extension, C&Ridge, Tam. 

(Surplus) 

ATOMIC ENERGY COl&lISSIONACTlVITIE3 

3 U.S. Atomic Energy Commission, Claaaified Technical 

Library, Washin&on 25, D.C. AlTN: Mrs. J. M. 

O'Leary (For IMA) 

2 Los Alama Sclurtlfic Iabomtory, Rapoti Library, Kl 

Box 1663, LosAlam8,I.M~. A~TN:H~~~IR&~~ 

5 Semdia Corporation, Classlflad Dot-t Division, 

Sandia Base, Albuquerque, N. Hex. AT-TN: H. J. 

S-h, Jr. 

3 University of California Radiation Laboratory, FQ Box 

@O8. Livermore. C&If. A'FTN: Clovie G. Craia 

1 weapon Data Section, Tschnical InfonmtIon S&ice Ertenelan, Of& Ridge, Tern. 

I.2 Technical Information SsmIce Exteneion, Cek Ridge, lbnn. 

(Surplue) 
‘.% . 

rs::-_, 

., ..< 
. . .