◆ SpookStack

FD-302a'(Rev. 10-6-95) 279A-WF-222936-USAMRIID Continuation of FD-302 of Bruce E. Ivins. ,On 09/08/2004 Page 4 grew the 1994/1995 batches of spores. These batches were so good that this challenge protocol was formalized as sop uIB-BI- 3. Ivins provided the interviewing agents with a copy of sop UIB-BI-3, which is maintained in an FD-340, in the 1A section of. the file. After creating RMR 1030, IVINs lcalculated b6 the number of spores needed for upcoming vaccine study work and b7C b7F determined that it would take approximately two years to grow enough spores for this work. As a result, Ivins contracted with e0t Ageneuneondde) aaaods saay ao nequnu abaer e moah on Aemong total spores). Ivins explained that the "Dugway spores" were made in 1997, combined with spores made at USAMRIID by IVINs and given the name "RmR 1029". IvINs believes that the portion of RMR 1029 grown at USAMRIID was grown using SOp UIB- BI-3. IvINs was unsure of the seed stock for the RMR 1029 spores grown at usaAMRIID, but believed that he would have used the same material as what was sent to Dugway. Uan Iog yeoas paed se L66t ut Aembng on seaods paddges drpdnean 1029 spores. IvINS shipped of Ames strain spores, in that was He was unsure of the seed stock for this shipment, but thought it may be in his notes. Ivins stated that for RmR 1029, he was more concerned with getting a large batch of spores than with ensuring uniformity in growth conditions. He was also not concerned with genetic variability in the Dugway batches that were prepared for RMR 1029. The entire RMR 1029 sample was lot, once combined into RMR 1029, was consistent. The final RMR. 1029 sample was 1000 mL at a concentration of approximately.3 x 1010 cfu/mL. reviewed his notes and determined that only 7 batches were made dae L6nt bupanp Apnenapornad way? paddgys pue (Aembng Aq eighth batch (later determined by Ivins to be the seventh) was. dirty and could not be purified by density gradient. IvINS non-refractile with a lot of debris and vegetative matter. Ivins does not recall seeing a non-Ba contaminant and noted that the sample was just bad Ba. Ivins did not know why this eya annaou nou pdp Aembng Aym mouy nou pdp pue peq sem nuaudgys notes and determined that this sample was autoclaved, although he does not recall if he was present when it was autoclaved.