Corrections to the FBI Summary report
Source: The modified report (see last page)

Analysis by Ed Lake
January 7, 2011


Original FBI Summary Report

Corrected FBI Summary Report

Page 24, third paragraph

Over the next five months, investigators endeavored to build a database of Ames samples for genetic comparison to the evidentiary material. The Grand Jury issued subpoenas to those 15 domestic and three foreign labs that investigators had determined possessed the Ames strain of Bacillus anthracis. The subpoena requested samples of each batch of the Ames strain held in a lab. It set forth the protocol to be used in taking those representative samples in order to ensure uniformity among submissions to what would become known as the FBI Repository (“FBIR”). Consent searches were also conducted at both USAMRIID and Dugway Proving Ground in Utah (“Dugway”), and a search warrant was executed at a private company in the midwest in 2004, to ensure that samples were taken from each stock of Ames in those facilities. In addition, a detailed review of laboratory notebooks, the genealogy of the Ames strain, and transfers was conducted to capture any unreported transfers of RMR-1029 – and none was discovered. A total of 1,070 samples were ultimately submitted, which represents a sample from every Ames culture at every laboratory identified by the FBI as having the Ames strain.
Page 24, third paragraph

Over the next five months, investigators endeavored to build a database of Ames samples for genetic comparison to the evidentiary material. The Grand Jury issued subpoenas to those 15 domestic and three foreign labs that investigators had determined possessed the Ames strain of Bacillus anthracis. The subpoena requested samples of each batch of the Ames strain held in a lab. It set forth the protocol to be used in taking those representative samples in order to ensure uniformity among submissions to what would become known as the FBI Repository (“FBIR”). Consent searches were also conducted at both USAMRIID and Dugway Proving Ground in Utah (“Dugway”), and a search warrant was executed at a private company in the midwest in 2004, to ensure that samples were taken from each stock of Ames in those facilities. In addition, a detailed review of laboratory notebooks, the genealogy of the Ames strain, and transfers was conducted to capture any unreported transfers of RMR-1029. A total of 1,070 samples were ultimately submitted, which represents a sample from every Ames culture at every laboratory identified by the FBI as having the Ames strain.
Page 75, subsection 10,

In February 2002, and again in April 2002, Dr. Ivins submitted samples of what he claimed was RMR-1029 to the FBI Repository for comparison with the evidentiary material. As detailed below, the first of these submissions matched the evidence, while the second did not. Investigators asked Dr. Ivins repeatedly about this discrepancy, to which he gave a number of inconsistent and illogical answers. They also spoke with a number of leading scientific experts in an effort to make some sense of what may have happened, including trying to run out any innocent explanation for this anomaly.
Page 75, subsection 10,

In February 2002, and again in April 2002, Dr. Ivins submitted samples of what he claimed was RMR-1029 to the FBI Repository for comparison with the evidentiary material. As detailed below, the first of these submissions appeared to match the evidence, in that it was positive for three of the four genetic markers, while the second did not. Investigators asked Dr. Ivins repeatedly about this discrepancy, to which he gave a number of inconsistent and illogical answers. They also spoke with a number of leading scientific experts in an effort to make some sense of what may have happened, including trying to run out any innocent explanation for this anomaly.
Page 79, third paragraph,

Because of this inconsistency, and knowing that Dr. Ivins also prepared a submission to the FBIR on February 27, 2002, which was destroyed by Dr. Ezzell’s lab, investigators contacted Dr. Keim and learned that he still maintained the duplicate slants of Dr. Ivins’s initial submission. In late 2006, the FBI obtained from Dr. Keim the duplicate slants from Dr. Ivins’s submission of February 27, 2002. Based on the handwriting on the labels from the slants, it was clear that Dr. Ivins and his lab technician each prepared two labels. The lab technician has stated that her handwriting on the labels indicated that she prepared the slant, and she would not have prepared a slant for which Dr. Ivins prepared the labels. The label prepared by Dr. Ivins on one of the slants read, “Ames strain RMR-1029 from Dugway (1997) Bruce Ivins 2/27/02.” This sample was then submitted to the FBIR for analysis. It had the four morphological variants, while his April submission had none.
Page 79, third paragraph,

Because of this inconsistency, and knowing that Dr. Ivins also prepared a submission to the FBIR on February 27, 2002, which was destroyed by Dr. Ezzell’s lab, investigators contacted Dr. Keim and learned that he still maintained the duplicate slants of Dr. Ivins’s initial submission. In late 2006, the FBI obtained from Dr. Keim the duplicate slants from Dr. Ivins’s submission of February 27, 2002. Based on the handwriting on the labels from the slants, it was clear that Dr. Ivins and his lab technician each prepared two labels. The lab technician has stated that her handwriting on the labels indicated that she prepared the slant, and she would not have prepared a slant for which Dr. Ivins prepared the labels. The label prepared by Dr. Ivins on one of the slants read, “Ames strain RMR-1029 from Dugway (1997) Bruce Ivins 2/27/02.” This sample was then submitted to the FBIR for analysis. It had three of the four morphological variants, while his April submission had none.
Page 79, fourth paragraph,

Based on a “Red Team” recommendation, experiments were prepared at the direction of the FBI Lab to address the FBIR submission process with regard to RMR-1029. RMR-1029 was sampled 30 times following the subpoena instructions. Occasionally, only three of the four genetic mutations were detected, and at no time were less than three detected. It followed that if Dr. Ivins prepared his submission to the repository in accordance with the protocol, that submission could not miss all four of the morphological variants present in RMR-1029.
Page 79, fourth paragraph,

Based on a ‘Red Team’ recommendation, experiments were prepared at the direction of the FBI Lab to address the FBIR submission process with regard to RMR-1029. RMR-1029 was sampled 30 times in accordance with the subpoena instructions. In a few instances, fewer than three markers were detected. However, in none of the 30 attempts were no markers detected. It followed that if Dr. Ivins prepared his submission to the repository in accordance with the protocol, that submission could not miss all four of the morphological variants present in RMR-1029.