◆ SpookStack

WY Fest © @ BI INFORMATION CONTATMED HEREIN. I5 UNCLASSIFIE ' DATE 1Z-08-z008 BY 60324 0 Analysis of Sample Date analyzed - 23 October, 2001 Date of Report - 24 October, 2001 Sample___ SPS02.88.01 | received the sample (in a microcentrifuge tube in a ziplock bag) from [bn the afternoon of 23 October, 2001. The t eighed, and it was estimated to contain abou of material. In B- of sterile water for injection was added to the material. After thorough mixing, the material was transferred to a second tube. The original tube was disinfected with bleach, dried and weighed. The net weight of the granular material was determined to be [ten-fold dilutions were plated out onto TSA, then incubated overnight. Plate counts were made, and it was determined that the original tube contained ince there was[______——_ of material, this calculates to be per gram of powder material. Visual inspection of the suspension of material under phase contrast microscopy found few (<5%) visible vegetative cells, a small amount (<10%) visible debris, and very few small clumps. Most of the material appeared to be individual refractile spores. Interpretations and conclusions: If this is a preparation of bacterial spores, it is a relatively pure preparation.. This preparation did not appear as pure as the material (SPS02.57.03) previously examined on October 17, 2001. The SPS02.57.03 preparation contained spores at a concentration of| [_] The SPS02.57.03 spores were thus approximately[__|times "hotter" or more concentrated per gram than the SPS02.88.01 spores examined here. Bruce E. Ivins, Ph.D. USAMRIID Bacteriology Division C BAW/RS/LSC-