Proposals are sought to demonstrate and validate unexploded ordnance (UXO) detection, classification, and localization (DCL) systems intended for the underwater environment at real-world sites where munitions are known to exist. Sites affected by munitions with depth ranges from the shoreline to water depths of 35 meters are of interest. Aquatic environments include ponds, lakes, rivers, estuaries, harbors, and coastal or open ocean areas. Munitions of interest range from small projectiles and mortars to large bombs. Technologies proposed may address only a subset of the entire range of potential munitions or environments. These technologies include but are not limited to:
- Acoustics
- Electromagnetic induction
- Magnetics
- Optical
Wide Area and/or Detailed Survey Technologies. DCL systems are needed to:
- Cost-effectively survey large (kilometer-scale) areas to identify and bound concentrations of munitions, determine the nature and extent of munitions contamination, support regulatory and site management decisions, and characterize site conditions that will affect any follow-on remediation.
- Provide evidence an area has not been used for munitions-related activities.
- Identify individual munitions so they can be recovered and disposed of in a wide range of environments (depth, density, clutter, sea bottom, turbidity, etc.).
Demonstrations are needed to establish and evaluate system performance, operating envelope, standard operating procedures, deployment strategies, and quality metrics to facilitate transition to commercial use.
Live Sites: ESTCP has identified the following live sites for potential demonstrations: These sites should be used for planning and costing and are subject to change. Coordination with both the lead agent and the landowners is to be expected.
Culebra, Puerto Rico
- Culebra was used by the Department of Defense (DoD) from 1903 to 1975 for aerial bombing, maneuvers, naval gun fire, artillery training, and amphibious training. An estimated 750,000 naval rounds were fired into the Northwest Peninsula. Prior to 1986, the DoD transferred much of the land to the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico. Across the island, a wide variety of munitions are known to have been used, including but not limited to 100-lb to 2000-lb bombs, projectiles, rockets, mortars, grenades, flares, and torpedoes.
- Two sites are of interest for the demonstration:
- MRS 3 - Flamenco Bay: Water depths range from shoreline to 40 ft, bottom types are sand, coral, and patchy seagrass; water clarity is normally very good; slopes are gentle to moderate; wave heights vary; and the site is on the windward side of the island. Primary interest is in the near-shore area that can be accessed by swimmers and waders.
- MRS 12 - Luis Pena Channel and Carlos Rosario Beach: Water depths are from the shore to 65 ft. The site contains a narrow bay that small boats can access and a popular dive/snorkel spot. Access is limited to boating or hiking trail.
San Diego Bay, California
- The site is a semi enclosed, crescent-shaped bay approximately 16.5 square miles at mean low water located in a busy seaport. The seafloor is relatively flat with the water depths range from 3 to 13 ft outside main shipping channel, where the maximum depth is 39 ft. Munitions have been released to San Diego Bay through loss overboard, sinking of ships, aircraft accidents, and training operations. The majority of munitions date from the late 1930s to mid-1950s and are Discarded Military Munitions (DMM).
- The Navy discovered munitions on a beach that was receiving dredge material as part of a sand-replenishment effort where the source of the sand was a Navy dredging operation in the San Diego Bay Primary Ship Channels. Munitions and Explosives of Concern (MEC) items have been encountered in many places during dredging projects (i.e., dragheads, cutterheads, pump casings, pipes, screen plants, placement sites), as well as following hurricanes and other storm events. A wide variety of munitions are known to be present.
Maine Bombing Area
- The site was used by the Naval Air Station (NAS) Brunswick for aerial rocket practice from 1944 through 1946 with munitions known to be present throughout the swash zone from the dunes to a water depth of 3 - 4 m. The primary target area is offshore. The site is very dynamic, with 10 to 12-foot tides and active erosion and deposition of beach sand. It is in a state park currently used as a recreational area. Munitions suspected to be present include 2.25-inch practice rockets, 3.5-inch practice rockets, 5-onch practice rockets.
- The primary area of interest is the surf zone extending from beach to roughly 20 feet water depth at low tide.
ESTCP also anticipates continuing limited use of the following test sites, as needed.
Sequim Bay
The Sequim Bay underwater test bed is maintained and operated by Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL). It is located in Washington state in a water depth of 5 to 30 meters with a variety of mud, sand, and gravel substrate. The protected non-urban embayment and temperate climate allows for testing during multiple seasons in optimal conditions. PNNL works with demonstrators on: 1) securing the necessary environmental permits and authorizations in a timely manner to conduct demonstrations, 2) handling all aspects of target and clutter items including obtaining, inventorying, collection of metadata, diver emplacement and recovery, geolocation with submeter accuracy, and secure storage, 3) designing target layouts in the test bed, and collection of environmental ground-truth and metadata for independent scoring of technology demonstrations, and 4) providing operational, logistical and facilities support to remediation system developers during deployment of their technologies.
Hawaii Test Site
The Hawaii test site is operated and maintained by the University of Hawaii. It offers testing of munitions response technologies in a mild climate, with a range of underwater visibility, and variety of environmental settings. A munitions test range complex consisting of multiple demonstration sites for evaluating and comparing the efficacy of MEC detection tools allows customizability depending upon the requirements of technology developers. The primary location is in Coconut Bay, a carbonate environment with good optical clarity. The site managers work with demonstrators on necessary permits. The site provides secure locations and resources to install rapidly deployable test configurations.
Duck, North Carolina
The Field Research Facility (FRF) in Duck, NC is operated by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. It fronts the Atlantic Ocean to the East and the Currituck Sound to the West in Northeastern, North Carolina. It is a natural littoral laboratory, with highly resolved wave and current information measured from the continental shelf through the surf zone, to the beach. The site is a research sanctuary with prohibitions on trawling and fishing to protect instrumentation that is semi-permanently installed on the sea floor and cabled back to shore. Typically, there are no permitting requirements at the FRF for common operations. A variety of munitions can be emplaced and anchored for controlled experiments using FRF vehicles. In addition, the FRF is a former Navy bombing test range, which has resulted in munitions scattered throughout the property including through the surf zone.
Demonstrations. Live-site demonstrations may be proposed at one or more of the live sites as applicable. Proposals should include a discussion of:
- The system to be demonstrated, including sensor(s), platform, navigation/geolocation, and processing.
- Analyses of data collected by system(s) above and deliverable products (list of detections, classification, and locations; maps; target responses; noise environment; processed data, etc.). The products must include target lists that will be subject to independent scoring of known seeded munitions or appropriate surrogates.
- The maturity of the system and/or components, a description of any prior testing, and a summary of test results.
- The live sites proposed and what characteristics of the proposed site(s) make them suitable for demonstration of the proposed technology, including physical characteristics of the site and munitions known or expected to be present
- The approximate scope of the proposed demonstration in acres, the expected production rate, the time required to complete the demonstration, and the proposed schedule.
- Performance objectives (Draft Table X) and methods for evaluating them (ESTCP website)
- Limitations of the technology (water depth, munitions size, production rate, sea state, depth of object in the sediment, etc.)
Proposed projects must plan for a live-site demonstration within approximately one year of funding. Up to one year of system integration and testing at a test site or suitable local facility can be supported. Proposals requiring system integration testing must include a discussion of performance metrics for a successful test that indicate the technology is ready for a live-site demonstration to support a go/no-go decision. Offerors proposing analysis methods only must identify specific data sets that they plan to use and include a letter of commitment from the data collector.
Proposed projects not resulting in a live-site demonstration will be considered non-responsive and will not be further evaluated.
A primary goal of this effort is to collect the data that will support transition of technology from a demonstration environment to use on sites where munitions must be managed or cleaned up. Proposals should provide a robust description of the plans for transition, including but not limited to:
- Deployment concept. It is expected that most characterization or cleanup will be conducted under the current model where work is contracted to the military departments responsible. Discuss how the proposed technology fits into that model (subcontract of current performers to the prime, direct implementation by the commercial contractor with purchased or leased equipment, something else). Discuss any needs and/or plans for mentoring or training.
- Discuss the questions that the expected product will support answers to. Where does it fit in CERCLA or site management? Will it locate areas impacted with munitions or provide evidence that no such contamination is present? Will it locate individual items? What are the expected limitations regarding surface or burial, depth in the sediment, water depth, clarity, munitions size, bottom conditions, clutter environment, etc.).
- Quality considerations for defensibility. What quality assurance parameters can be measured and monitored to ensure the data is of sufficient quality to support decision making and actions, and to gain stakeholder acceptance? The demonstration plan will require the detailed specification of Measurement Quality Objectives. (reference example QAPP WS 22). MQOs need not be fully developed in the proposal, but a discussion of critical parameters is required.