REVIEW OF LASER DAZZLER USED BY MARINES IN IRAQ CITES SAFETY ISSUES
_______________________________________________
A recent review of a non-lethal laser weapon that Marines in Iraq use to temporarily blind seemingly threatening individuals has underscored the need for stricter safety procedures, according to the Marine Corps Center for Lessons Learned.
The device in question is the B.E. Meyers GBD-IIIC model of the laser dazzler, the only such system approved for use in Iraq by the Navy Laser Safety Review Board. Other systems with the same purpose are used by the Army and special operations troops.
The GBD-IIIC is designed to provide a green laser beam that can be pulsed like a strobe by Marines conducting convoy operations and manning vehicle check points, entry control points and perimeter security positions.
Reports of "possible eye injuries to users resulting from employment of the GBD-IIIC" led the Marine Corps Center for Lessons Learned to develop a questionnaire for deployed units concerning the performance and safety of the laser dazzler, according to an internal newsletter issued this month by the center. The survey results, which have since informed the center's updated report on the GBD-IIIC, are summarized in the newsletter.
"The consensus of those surveyed was that the GBD-IIIC is effective in preventing escalation of force (EOF) incidents, but that there are possible safety issues," the center writes.
Attached to the report is guidance on the employment of lasers from the Multi-National Force-West (MNF-W) Safety Officer.
"The document notes that there have been several incidents in which coalition forces have been accidentally 'lased', but no reports of permanent eye injuries," the newsletter says.
MNF-W spokesman Lt. Shawn Mercer said that statement is accurate.
Capt. Teresa Ovalle, a spokeswoman for the Joint Non-Lethal Weapons Directorate in Quantico, VA, said the directorate is "unaware of any substantiated eye injuries due to GBD-IIIC use."
Bruce Westcoat, vice president for business development at B.E. Meyers, said he is not aware of any incidents in which there were eye injuries caused by the GBD-IIIC. He also said he is not aware of any incidents in which coalition forces have been accidentally lased by the device. Westcoat stressed the system is saving lives in Iraq by giving troops an alternative to lethal force when seeking to deter vehicles from approaching.
The survey found that while the GBD-IIIC is "non-lethal," a number of survey respondents said it should still be treated as a weapon.
"Several suggested that the laser should initially be pointed at the flank of the vehicle, then on the hood, and only on the windshield after prior actions failed to cause the vehicle to stop," the newsletter says.
Once the laser hits a vehicle's windshield, it lights up the entire interior of the vehicle, according to an unnamed military policeman quoted by the center.
Many divergent opinions were expressed by the survey respondents concerning the utility of the laser dazzler, but there were also common themes in the responses, according to the center.
"The device is not a toy and Marines should be conscious of eye safety," the newsletter says. "Marines should not shine the dazzler in anyone's face within 114 meters for ten consecutive seconds."
MNF-W is developing a standing operational procedure (SOP) for the laser dazzler that addresses safety, training and employment.
"It is recognized that the use of laser dazzler devices can be an important tool in avoiding unnecessary EOF incidents on individuals who pose no threat to coalition forces; however, the potential hazards of their use must be mediated through accountability, training and employment of strict SOPs," the center writes.
Mercer declined to discuss the SOP, citing operational security.
Ovalle confirmed the directorate has sent information such as testing and evaluation documents and user evaluations to MNF-W to assist in the development of the SOP.
Units surveyed said sufficient quantities of the GBD-IIIC should be issued so they are available for every convoy. Several of the respondents rated the effectiveness of the device's ability to cause drivers to stop their vehicles at 75 to 100 percent.
It was generally agreed the dazzler is more effective at night and it is difficult to aim during daylight hours. The daytime range is only 500 feet (with a visible dot only), while at night the range is about 10,000 feet (with the dot and beam visible). These distances can be severely curtailed in heavy dust or fog.
The survey found Marines should be given the flexibility, within defined parameters, to decide the most appropriate means of de-escalating a specific situation by choosing among the resources available, including the laser dazzler, pyrotechnics and flags.
Iraqis should be educated on the meaning of the device as it pertains to escalation of force, participants noted. Without this education via radio or notices, the use of the dazzler could initially increase the likelihood of escalating incidents instead of de-escalating them, the review found.
Survey participants also said Marines need to be trained on the device regardless of their position in the convoy, because an individual's role in a convoy can change.
This year, there has been debate within the Marine Corps about whether Marines should instead use a competing product called the Compact High Power Laser Dazzler (CHPLD), made by LE Systems, which contends military testing shows its product is in some ways safer. Marine officials in Iraq specifically requested the CHPLD in 2005 and 2006. But other Marine officials in Quantico, VA, procured the GBD-IIIC instead and have stood by that decision. And, in February, the Navy Laser Safety Review Board refused to approve the CHPLD system.
One of the of deficiencies cited in the board's report on the CHPLD system is an "eye hazard distance" of 121 meters. "This is assuming a 10-second exposure duration rather than the typical 0.25 second exposure duration based on the intended use of the system," the Navy board's report says.
In April, Lt. Gen. James Amos, head of Marine Corps Combat Development Command, responded to complaints raised by Titus Casazza, president of LE Systems, with a letter that defends the decisions about the CHPLD made by Marine acquisition officials and the Navy board.
In May, Casazza accused Marine acquisition officials of anticompetitive practices and complained to Marine Corps System Command that officials were attempting to impose unachievable requirements on CHPLD.
Casazza told
ITP he asked to consult with Marine Corps technical experts but has not heard back from the service. He said some Marine officials had lied by saying his company had been given funding to make improvements to the CHPLD and that LE Systems had not provided the service with certain information.
Other U.S. military personnel in Iraq use the CHPLD, but the Marines do not, said Mercer. Although Marines in Iraq initially purchased 28 CHPLD systems to meet an urgent requirement, they were prohibited from using those systems. Instead, Marine Corps Systems Command fielded the GBD-IIIC.
According to the center, at least three other laser dazzler systems besides the GBD-IIIC have been used in Iraq that have not been approved by the Navy and Marine Corps.
Many of these laser dazzler devices are available as commercial off-the-shelf items, the newsletter says, noting procurement of these devices can make it very difficult to maintain accountability and formulate proper training and tactics, techniques, and procedures.
Ovalle said the non-lethal directorate is aware there are "other models of optical distractors in theater." Each service can procure its own equipment through various acquisition processes to meet the essential needs for its mission, she said. -
- Christopher J. Castelli
OK, it is focusable, and water... resistant, or proof? And... :shrug: what I can drop kick it? I'm confussed...
