The objective of this Topic Area is to demonstrate and validate unexploded ordnance (UXO) Detection, Classification, and Localization (DCL) systems, in underwater environments at testbeds and/or real-world sites with known munitions presence. Demonstrations should focus on evaluating system capabilities, developing operational concepts, and establishing quality metrics to support the transition of these technologies to broader use. Target sites include aquatic environments such as ponds, lakes, rivers, estuaries, harbors, and coastal or open ocean areas, with depth ranges from the shoreline to 35 meters. Munitions of interest span from small projectiles and mortars to large bombs. Proposals may focus on a subset of environments or munitions types.

Technologies sought include but are not limited to:

• Acoustic
• Electromagnetic Induction
• Magnetic
• Optical

Specific solutions sought include:

Wide Area and/or Detailed Survey Technologies. Wide Area DCL systems must efficiently survey large areas (kilometer-scale) to identify and delineate munitions concentrations, assess the nature and extent of munitions, verify areas free from munitions-related activities, and support regulatory and site management decisions. These systems may also demonstrate characterization of site conditions affecting subsequent remediation efforts. Detailed surveys should locate individual munitions for recovery and disposal in diverse environments (e.g., varying depths, densities, seafloor conditions, and water turbidity).

Proposals must outline the following:

• A detailed plan for live-site demonstrations, including system components, testing protocols, and site characteristics.
• Analyses of collected data and deliverables such as detection results, classification and localization outputs, maps, and processed datasets.
• A timeline for live-site demonstrations within one year of funding, with up to one year for system integration and testing at a local facility if necessary.
• Performance objectives and evaluation methods to determine readiness for live-site testing.
• Transition plans describing deployment concepts, cleanup or site management utility, and quality assurance measures.
• Proposals must also specify costs for technology preparation, demonstration, and reporting while excluding site-specific support costs, which will be covered by ESTCP or military services.

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.

Vieques, Puerto Rico 

• Located on the eastern side of Vieques Island, Puerto Rico, the Atlantic Fleet Weapons Training Area- Vieques Naval Training Range (VNTR) was utilized from 1941-2001 and has a wide range of munition types. This site offers both deep and shallow water scenarios where the full portfolio of underwater technologies can be tested.
• Sites that are of interest for the demonstration: Deep water and near surf-zone beaches on both the northern and southern sides of the areas known as the Eastern Maneuver Area (EMA), Live Impact Area (LIA), and Surface Impact Area (SIA). Water depths available for demonstration range from zero to approximately 80 feet.
• The EMA was established in 1947 to provide military maneuvering area and ranges for training in amphibious landing.
• The LIA was established in 1965, where several targets were maintained for aerial bombing including old tanks and vehicles, many simulated targets, and targets used for ships to practice naval gunfire.
• The SIA was established in the 1950s when several Marine artillery targets were constructed; in 1969, a bullseye target was constructed and used for inert bombing.
• Munitions are expected to be both proud and buried with a full range of munitions calibers/sizes from small to large.

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 water depths ranging 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.

Demonstration Sites: 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 with water depths of 5 to 30 meters with a variety of mud, sand, and gravel substrate. The protected non-urban embayment and temperate weather 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 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, North Carolina 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 or test sites as applicable. Proposals should include a discussion of the following:

• The system or model to be demonstrated, including sensor(s), platform, navigation/geolocation, processing, and assumptions behind associated models.
• Analyses of data collected by system(s) or model(s) above and deliverable products (list of detections, classification, and locations; maps; target responses; noise environment; processed data, site parameters, 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 or model 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 1 in the MR Demonstration Plan) and methods for evaluating them (ESTCP website).
• Limitations of the technology or model (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 receipt 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 indicates 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.

Technology Transfer

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:

• Discuss the questions to which the expected product will support answers. Where does it fit in CERCLA or site management? Will it locate areas impacted by 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 Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) Worksheet 22). MQOs need not be fully developed in the proposal, but a discussion of critical parameters is required.

Cost Section

• Proposals to demonstrate a technology on multiple sites should contain separate cost sections for each site.
• Proposal costs should be confined to the cost of preparing the technology for demonstration (including any system integration and testing), mobilization, conducting the demonstration, demobilization, processing and analysis, preparing deliverable products, and reporting.
• Proposals should identify needs for site support, such as calibration line emplacement, seed emplacement, ground truthing, explosives safety plans, and any other on-site support needed, but these costs should NOT be included in the proposal. These costs will be supported separately by ESTCP and the military services. 

Results from this work will provide expanded capability to cost-effectively characterize, remediate, and manage munitions response sites in the underwater environment and to deploy advanced technologies for a wide diversity of site conditions. This can result in more cost effective and environmentally friendly methods for managing munitions response sites, benefiting both military and civilian communities. 

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) and the U.S. Navy have identified more than 400 underwater sites that are potentially impacted with munitions. Most areas are in shallow water (0-35 m) where the munitions may impact human health and the environment. Some of these sites date back to the 18th century and others were used as recently as this decade. Property potentially containing munitions in underwater environments exceeds 10 million acres.