7 September 1971 IlEtIO7',ANDIR@l FOR TIIE RECORD SUBJI-:CT: Trip Report Personnel Incapacitation Contract Status 1. This contract was scheduled to terminate 31 October 1971. However, as of 31 July only 25% of the funds had be2en expended as compared with a projected 75% expenditure. The Project Officer had been made aware of this situation as it was a consequence of assigned personnel being engaged in the completion of other high priority , Aoency tasks. In as mucli as the Division had no funds for extending the project or initiating follow-on tasks, it did not seem appropriate to insist that2 the contractor maintain his planned schedule. A no- cost extcnsion until 30 April 1972 has been requested and approved. 2., The essential ptirpose of the visit was to structure definitive plans for continuation of the project. The principal investigator and his collegues had outlined several alternative approaches for discussion with the Proj2ect Officer. These included, but were not limited to: a. Extensive library search along with consultant assistance to provide an extensive annotated bibliography in the area of personnel incapacitation. b. Establishment of Consultant Workshops and Ad Hoc Com- mittees to evaluate present and hopefully generate new concepts 2 of personnel incapacitation. c. on the basis of available information, to structure psychological and physiological continua of incapacitation from alertness to death. The concept is similar to that of the anesthesiologist's "planes of consciousness." 'ly of incapacitation d. A detail3ed study of a single fani, methods, i.e., Impact, Cliemical, Sensory Overload, etc. SUBJECT: Trip Report Personnel Incapacitation Contract StiLus 3. on the basis of extended discussions, mutual a"reament was reached on the followinc, plan of iction; minimum effort (10%) %-Jill be devoted to continuin- aquisition and review of new documents. 2 The contractor will continue to remain.alart to new concepts of personnel incapacitation. To date the only new possibilities not previously considered by others in this area are: a. Use of /as a tasteless, odorless, incapaci@atiii:@_gas not requiring an antidote or leaving body traces. L-Personne2l are co-,ipletely familiar with the use of-- Idata from submarine and space habitability studies, industrial medicine and other sources. liowever, lhas not been considered in terms of our personnel incapacitation requirements. Recognizin- the necessity for closed space application, the scenarios for whi2ch controlled concentrations of -- lwould be applicable are quite limited. b. The second "new" concept in terms of utilization for temporary personnel incapacitation, is the use of as a vehicle for transmission of incapacitatin- chemical agents 0 thro2ugh the skin. The contractor is completely.ai-7are of previotis unclassified research in this area.. In fact, lis doing other work for the Aaency in the area of toxicoloa c@ Y for which I do not have a-"need to knoii." It is quite possible that certain of th2e contractor personnel are aware of previous classified res@arch in the area. ass3.gned to this project, has worked extensively iiith. and should have the back-round to rapidly determine it's applicability for our requirements. 4. It was mutually agreed that if a first appraisal of these two concepts indicates low probabil2itv of success, work would be discontinued regarding perhaps, in the course of con- tinuing effort under this contract they will generate other pos- sibilities. Parenthetically, one of the reasons for letting the initial contract with the -. iwas the hope that an o!rganization with a medical orientation, loo2king.at the problem from the man to the aeent rather than from the agent or hardware CD to the man,, could generate concepts not previously considered. However, as indicated in the previous trip report dated 18 ilay 1971) "both they and the Pi:oject officer are aware that a gamble on new ideas is a Iii-h risk investment.'' -2- SUBJECT: Trip Rcport Personnel Incapacitation Contract Stittis 5. The third and perhaps most si-nificant area of effort, assuriiin(, the contractor does not gcnerate a riajor brealcthrou-Ii with a new concept, is a systems analysis of potential incapacitation methods. The contra2ctor will conduct a systems analysis of energy sources, i.e.,, impact, liaht, sound, electric current, chemical and others in terms of C> 'physical aspects of the aoent, delivery system, physiolo-ical and medical considerations, applications and limitations, and reconmcndations. Emphasis will be placed upon 2 the physiological and medical aspects as opposed to delivery systems and operational factors. A plan for a systems analysis of vis ual incapacitation was generated by this office and for which have submitted a written requirement to implement. (Attachment I). The contractor will utilize this document as a guideline for his systems analysis effort. 6. In spite of extens2ive thouoht and experimentation by com- petent authorities, none have defined an efficient non-lethal fwill weapon system. Perhaps, in the course of their work do so. Ho@iever, if this does not materialize they should still meet the essential requirements of their contract, which as stated in the2 Bluebook, "this project will or-anize available data in a c@ matrix fashion so that at any given time one could determine the specific research parameters necessary to fill in the'gaps to provide required systems . . . to provide a data bank of information concerning the physiological effect of energy sources as these may be ap9propriate to the development of long range systems." The philosophy is identical to that expressed in Attachment I. I feel the contractor will satisfactorily meet the contract require- ments within the extended time span. -3- ATTACIIj\lEi\TT 1 Rationale for Visual Impairment Systems Analysis Most military and civil law enforcement operations are dependent upon normal functionina of the human visual system. This fict applies to both military and civil offensive operations as well as protection or countermeasures against the use of light energy2 by hostile forces. A brief review of light energy utilization to impair personnel efficiency indicates periods of heiahtened research activity followed by intervals of casual attention. Such accelerated R&D emphasis has occurred in response to battlefield illumination requirements anti-aircraft personnel incapacitation, protection against atomic flash, pulsin2a light to produce confusion and disorientation, develop- ment of and protection acrainst laser weapons, non-injurious systems for crowd and riot control, as well as in response to other aperiodic., urgent situations. In the area of handheld projectile weapons we can specify the field requirements, turn to a data bank of ordnance R&D, and at, least obtai2n a reasonable approximation of sys'tem specifications to meet the requirements. However, in the case of liaht energy and the incremental course of visual impairment, w.e do not have such a data bank. As a result, we are in a position of "fire fighting" as requirements arise-or as the--consequence of scientific breakthrou 'ghs, i.e., atomic energy, laser beams, retro-reflective optics, e2tc. The composition of the requirement is based uc)on a set of scenarios, each of which may have unique parameters, and dictates the type of approach which may be most feasible. For instance, typical field situations or scenarios for'which light energy has been suggested as a means for personnel control are: non-lethal capture of military personnel or civil arrest2 of an individual; dazzlina to permit automobile escape of potential kidnap victim; to thwart aircraft and truck highjackina; crov.,d .and riot control; and, from the military point of view, the utilization of light enera to facilitate stoppin,7 moving vehicles by incapaciLLatincr the driver, neutralizing accurate fire power from a hostile bunker, disablina ant5i-aircraft trackin(t cre@xis" prevention of barrier penctra't-.,.on to a secure area, and battlefield illumination. Each of these scenarios has been investigated as a unique prol)leni or field reqtiireniciit \vitliolit a sysicn-iptic analysis of the similarities and differences. Often the response to the individual requirement covers the complete cycle -isic research to production. As a re ult, the process is from b, s lengtl-iy, expensive, and frequently repetitive. 2 A-luch of the inefficiency with existing procedures would be reduced if a systems analysis pro-ram was undertaken ,vhich would provide a taxonomic base for diverse scenario requirements, approaches, equipment, acceptable risk, etc. For example, the ambient illiirnination ,vithin which incapacitation must be accomplished defines a m2inii-num brightness'Nvhich must be produced while the anatoinical structure of the eye plus the risk of damage which the situation allows define the maxii-num brightness. The number of personnel involved together with the possible demand for concealment are important in the choice between pyrotechnic devices and optical devices. The wavelength of light emitted and the duration of i2nter- mittancy of exposure can be controlled to produce a variety of effects appropriate to the degree of risk one can assunie in the continuum from dazzle to permanent retinal damage. Utilizing the systems approach, it should be possible to create a framework within which, fragmentary advances can be preserved and structured so as to pro- vide a basis for initiating resp2onses to specific requirements on a timely basis. As a first step an extensive sample of scenario requirements must be analyzed to identify si-nificant parameters and combinations of parameters. This would be followed by a study of the various characteristics of 1"lahL energy and techniques of uses as they apply to the scenario parametric classifications2. Subsequent development would include consideration of physioloc7ical and psychological effects, equipment capabilities, countermeasures, system factors, and other variables which are identified as related to the selection of visual incap-acitatina approaches for defined requirements. A visual impairment systems analysis as outlined2 above would not only be of major importance to diverse DOD elemenls, but would -also provide required data and research guidelines for many speciali7.ed Governmental organizitions such -@s the LEAA, FBI, CIA, Secret Service and civil la%,i enforcement bodies which should be coanizant of systems for the protection or control of inclivicliials and groups b2y means of li-ht oner,o;y. Such a pro,rrai-n %votilci provide a mitrix froi-n which efficient and econon-iical P,&-D ro-r,-tn-is could be -oncrate(i (or perhaps not p i. z:l generated on the basis of tlio s3-,-tcrns analysis i3nformation) in terms of the ipl)licatioiis and recILirci-notits of specific Govclilnmc.,iital or-aniza'Lions. VISUAL INCA11ACITATION SYSTEMS ANALYSIS* III IV v VI Potential A,,)f)lications Light Energy Visual Systeni@* Other System Equipment Re c t ir- 2 qf Li-ht Eiiergy 'Lor. Physical Variabl@s Variables Factors Stat-e of ArL Personiiel Control -------------- 14avelength Recovery Time User Risk Pyrotechnic ]Zcscarcii Req. -------------- Intensity Damage Risk 2 Emplacerrent Electric Gas ProtcLype Dav -------------- Duration Possil)lc. Reliability 'Radiating Body Test -------------- Rise Time Temporary Logistics Laser Evaluation -------------- Intermittent 2 Periiiainent Covertness Retroreflection -------------- Flash Area Component Affected Size ---------------- Visual Angle Lens Filming 1,.7eiglit Cornea Florescence' Power 2 Tear Ducts CGST, etc. Retina Occipital Cortex Disorientation Pain 2 Occulomotor Spasm This sequence or format for a systems analysis of visual impairment is not intended to be complete or even suggestive of the proper approach. Individuals experienced in the area of systems analysis and competent in the field of physical and pliysio- logica2l optics could undoubtedly structure a more appropriate experimental design. One of the major categories in a complete systeins analysiq should be some sort of a table,, chart, or other Lype of clear presentatio'n relating physiological visual impairn,ent to performance efficiency., The word "impairment" only has significance 2 in regard to the efficiency with which a hostile individual(s) can perform a speci- fied task. Vision may be reduced to 20/400 on the Snellen Chart, but the individual can still shoot a human target at 50 feet. In.other words, somewhere in the systems analysis light energy, physiological impairment and certain classes of task dec3rement must be related.