Technology Committee Report
National Association of Ordnance Contractors
BOD / GM Meeting
November 19 - 21, 2013
San Antonio, Texas
www.naoc.org
Committee Members

Brian Brunette, AECOM

Craig Murray, Parsons

Steve Stacy, ARCADIS

Tom Bell, SAIC

Tamir Klaff, CH2M Hill

John Herbert, SAIC

David Wright, CH2M Hill

Dean Keiswetter, SAIC

Kevin Sharpe, EA Engineering

Jeff Leberfinger, TerrannearPMC

Mike McGuire, EA Engineering

Mike Warminsky, Tidewater

Kent Boler, Matrix Design Group

Al Crandall, USA Environmental

John Allan, NAEVA Geophysics

Ryan Steigerwalt, Weston Solutions

John Breznick, NAEVA Geophysics

Brian Junck, Weston Solutions
www.naoc.org
2
Technology Committee
Activities in 2013

SERDP/ESTCP:
 UX-Analyze Training

In-Progress Review Meetings

Naming conventions for Advanced EMI Measurements

Geophysicist Qualifications for Advanced Classification (ITRC)

Geophysical Reporting Requirements for USACE Work
www.naoc.org
3
Technology Committee
SERDP / ESTCP
UX-Analyze Training Course

Class held February 19 - 20 in Washington, D.C.

Class held February 27 – 28 in Denver

20 – 25 participants for each class
www.naoc.org
4
Technology Committee
SERDP / ESTCP
IPR Meetings
 First meeting February 12th

Mike Warminsky attended

Notes posted on NAOC website

Agenda and presentations posted on NAOC website
www.naoc.org
5
Technology Committee
SERDP / ESTCP
IPR Meeting (Cont’d.)
Agenda
Tuesday, February 12, 2013
09:00
Convene/Operating Remarks
SERDP/ESTCP
Deputy Director
09:55
MR-2225: Advanced EM1 Models and Classification Algorithms: The Next Level of
Sophistication to Improve Discrimination of Challenging Targets. (SERDP)
Dr. Fridon Shubitidze
Dartmouth College
09:55
MR-2226: Decision Support Tools for Munitions Response Performance Prediction and
Risk Assessment. (SERDP)
Dr. Laurens Beran
Sky Research
10:40
Break
10:55
MR-2224: Simple Parameterized Models for Predicting Mobility, Burial, and Re-exposure
of Underwater Munitions. (SERDP)
Dr. Carl Friedrichs
Virginia Institute of
Marine Science
11:40
MR-201234: Vortex Lattice Mobility Model Integration. (ESTCP)
Dr. Gerald D’Spain
Scripps Institution of
Oceanography
12:25
Lunch
www.naoc.org
6
Technology Committee
SERDP / ESTCP
IPR Meeting (Cont’d.)
Agenda
Tuesday, February 12, 2013
13:30
MR-2229: Inversion of High Frequency Acoustic Data for Sediment Properties Needed
for Detection and Classification of UXOs. (SERDP)
Dr. B. Todd Hefner
University of Washington
14:15
MR-2230: Data and Processing Tools for Sonar Classification of Underwater UXO. (SERDP)
Dr. Raymond Lim
Naval Surface Warfare Center
15:00
Break
15:15
MR-2231: Acoustic Response of Underwater Munitions near a Sediment Interface:
Measurement-Model Comparison and Classification Schemes. (SERDP)
Dr. Steven Kargl
University of Washington
16:00
MR-2228: Development and Testing of an Engineering Prototype of a Marine Version
of the Berkeley Unexploded Ordnance Discriminator (BUD). (SERDP)
Dr. H. Frank Morrison
Marine Advanced Research
16:45
Committee Discussion (Closed Door)
17:30
Adjourn
www.naoc.org
7
Technology Committee
SERDP / ESTCP
IPR Meetings
 Second meeting May 7th - 8th

Al Crandall attended

Notes posted on NAOC website

Agenda and presentations posted on NAOC website
www.naoc.org
8
Technology Committee
SERDP / ESTCP
IPR Meeting
Agenda
Tuesday, May 7, 2013
08:30
Convene/Opening Remarks
SERDP/ESTCP
Deputy Director
08:40
MR-1711: Bulk Magnetization Effects in EMI-Based Classification and Discrimination
Dr. Tom Bell
SAIC
09:25
MR-200837: Statistical Verification and Remediation Sampling Methods
Demonstrations. (ESTCP)
Mr. Brent Pulsipher
Pacific Northwest
National Laboratory
10:10
Break
10:25
MR-201264: Real-Time Quality Control Methods for Cued EMI Data Collection (ESTCP)
Mr. Jonathan Miller
White River
Technologies
11:10
MR-201105: High-Power Vehicle-Towed TEM for Small Ordnance Detection (ESTCP)
Mr. Jeff Gamey
Battelle
11:55
Lunch
13:00
MR-1712: Bistatic Portable Electromagnetic Induction Sensor with Integrated
Positioning. (SERDP)
www.naoc.org
Dr. Ben Barrowes
ERDC
9
Technology Committee
SERDP / ESTCP
IPR Meeting (Cont’d)
Agenda
Tuesday, May 7, 2013
13:00
MR-1712: Bistatic Portable Electromagnetic Induction Sensor with Integrated
Positioning. (SERDP)
Dr. Ben Barrowes
ERDC
13:45
MR-2201: Classification Study Using a Handheld, Three-element EMI Sensor, (Sensor) (Outbrief)
Dr. Tom Bell
SAIC
14:30
Break
14:45
MR-200910/MR-201235: Analysis of Multi-axis, Multi-coil EMI Sensor data for UXO
Discrimination/Capturing Lessons Learned as Revealed by Large Scale Classification
Demonstration Data (ESTCP)
15:30
Committee Discussion (Closed Door)
16:15
Adjourn
www.naoc.org
Dr. Dean Keiswetter
SAIC
10
Technology Committee
SERDP / ESTCP
IPR Meeting (Cont’d)
Agenda
Wednesday, May 8, 2013
08:30
Convene/Opening Remarks
SERDP/ESTCP
Deputy Director
08:35
MR-201233: Demonstration of ROV-based Underwater Electromagnetic Array
Technology. (ESTCP)
Dr. Gregory Schultz
White River
Technologies
09:20
MR-201234: Vortex Lattice UXO Mobility Model Integration. (ESTCP)
Demonstrations. (ESTCP)
Dr. Gerald D’Spain
Scripps
10:05
Break
10:20
MR-2103: Structural Acoustic UXO Detection and Identification in Marine Environments. (SERDP)
Dr. Brian Houston
NRL
11:05
MR-2104: Real-Time Hand-Held Magnetometer Array. (SERDP)
Dr. Mark Prouty
Geometrics
11:50
Lunch
13:00
MR-2227: Underwater Munitions Expert System to Predict Mobility and Burial. (SERDP)
www.naoc.org
Dr. Sarah Rennie
Johns Hopkins
11
Technology Committee
SERDP / ESTCP
IPR Meetings

Third meeting October 29th

Jeff Leberfinger attended

Notes posted on NAOC website

Agenda and presentations posted on NAOC website
www.naoc.org
12
Technology Committee
SERDP / ESTCP
IPR Meetings
Agenda
Tuesday, October 29, 2013
08:30
Convene/Opening Remarks
SERDP/ESTCP
Deputy Director
08:40
MR-201235: Capturing Lessons Learned as Revealed by Large Scale Classification
Demonstration Data (ESTCP)
Dr. Dean Keiswetter
SAIC
09:25
MR-201233: Demonstration of ROV-based Underwater Electromagnetic Array
Technology (ESTCP)
Dr. Gregory Schultz
White River
Technologies
10:10
Break
10:25
MR-201102: Semi-Automated Ferrous Material Scouring System (ESTCP)
Mr. Christopher Fromme
Carnegie Mellon
11:10
MR-201105: High-Power Vehicle-Towed TEM for Small Ordnance Detection (ESTCP)
Mr. Jeff Gamey
Battelle
11:55
Lunch
13:00
Committee Discussion (Closed Door)
14:15
Adjourn
www.naoc.org
13
Technology Committee
Naming Conventions for Advanced EMI
Measurements

Problem Statement: “Tracking of anomalies from detection to resolution
(intrusive investigation or a ‘no dig’ decision) to archiving is critical to the QA/QC
process and ultimate goals of any munitions remediation effort. To facilitate this
anomaly tracking, seamless integration of anomaly identifiers (which may include
grid numbers, transect numbers, initial acquisition file pointers etc.) into the
advanced analysis workflow is required. Without this integration the advanced
analysis process will be subject to unneeded complexity and errors associated
with having to deal with multiple naming conventions.”

There is no industry wide anomaly naming convention and the goal of this is not
to develop one but to generate a file naming convention and header structure
that will accommodate the variety of naming methods.
www.naoc.org
14
Technology Committee
Naming Conventions for Advanced EMI
Measurements
Internal “Tiger Team”:
Person
Dave Wright (Leader)
Alison Paski
Rob Siegel
Brian Junck
Dean Keiswetter
www.naoc.org
Company
CH2M Hill
NAEVA Geophysics
SAIC
Weston Solutions
SAIC
15
Technology Committee
Naming Conventions for Advanced EMI
Measurements
 Final document submitted to NAOC President on
November 6th
www.naoc.org
16
Technology Committee
Global Leader in Munitions Response
Advanced EMI Measurement Nomenclature
PREPARED FOR: John Allan
COPY TO:
Dean Keiswetter
Alison Paski
Robert Siegel
Brian Junk
PREPARED BY:
DATE:
David Wright/BOS
November 6, 2013
A volunteer task force was assembled to discuss and recommend naming conventions for advanced EMI
measurements and files such that they will fit into the processes used by NAOC member companies. The members of this task
force include David Wright (CH2M HILL), Alison Paski (NAEVA Geophysics Inc.), Dean Keiswetter (Science Applications
International Corporation), Robert Siegel (Science Applications International Corporation) and Brian Junk (Weston Solutions)
The problem was stated as follows:
Tracking of anomalies from detection to resolution (intrusive investigation or a ‘no dig’ decision) to archiving is critical to the
QA/QC process and ultimate goals of any munitions remediation effort. To facilitate this anomaly tracking, seamless integration
of anomaly identifiers (which may included grid numbers, transect numbers, initial acquisition file pointers etc) into the advanced
analysis workflow is required. Without this integration the advanced analysis process will be subject to unneeded complexity and
errors associated with having to deal with multiple naming conventions.
www.naoc.org
17
Technology Committee
After defining the problem, the group had an initial meeting and identified the following requirements:
o
The capability to add (1) two prefixes (both strings) and a (2) data type (string) at acquisition, which would then be
stored in the HDF5 header tags.
o
The intent is that one of the prefix strings would be attached to the target ID (a number) to make the combined string
unique. This prefix would enable users, perhaps, to record the grid ID (alphanumeric) or transect ID. The second prefix
should pass through to the data analysis soft- ware and be stored with the data, but it would not be attached to the target
ID. This might serve to store the AOC or Site name, perhaps.
o
The ‘data type’ entry refers to limited number of labels, to include at a minimum ‘blind’, ‘IVS’, ‘test’, and ‘background’.
The data type should be stored in the HDF5 tag as well as the filename somehow (perhaps abbreviated...).
At a subsequent meeting between representatives from the ESTCP program office (Herb Nelson); advanced analysis software
developers (Dean Keiswetter, SAIC), industry service providers (David Wright, CH2M HILL) and equipment manufacturers (Bart
Hoekstra, Geometrics) this subject was dis- cussed and the following naming convention was proposed:
“ProjectPrefix_TargetID_type_vers”
Where:
Project Prefix: any alphanumeric characters used to describe the project (e.g. Ft Rucker). This set of characters will be kept as
a reference in the database, but will not necessarily be attached to every target identifier.
www.naoc.org
18
Technology Committee
Target ID is comprised of a GeoID and Target###:
GeoID = any set of alphanumeric characters used to identify the geophysical unit that the measurement was made in
(e.g. grid, survey, or transect). This set of characters will form part of the unique TargetID
Target## = a numeric identifier specific to the target for static collection or survey unit (e.g. sortie number) for dynamic
collection. The combination of GeoID and Target## is a number that should be unique to the project (or installation)
Type – identifies one of 7 specific measurement types
Version – identifies the measurement version associated with the Target ID
Proposed Format:
PPPPP_[GGGG_TTTTT]_YY_VV where: PPPPP = Project name (alphanumeric)
Square brackets indicate TargetID:
GGGG = Geophysical unit (alphanumeric)
TTTTT = numeric (integer)
YY = measurement type (2 characters*)
VV = version numeric (integer)
www.naoc.org
19
Technology Committee
*Measurement type codes:
AM
Anomaly Measurement
Static measurements over an identified location with
an unknown anomaly source
BG
Background Measurement
Static measurement over a non-anomalous location
DS
Dynamic Survey
Dynamic survey for detection and classification of potential
MEC
DQ
Dynamic QC (IVS line)
Dynamic survey of an IVS used for QC purposes
FT
Function Test
A direct test of all sensor component responses to a standard object placed at a precisely know location (relative
to the sensor).
QC
Quality Control (static
IVS)
Static survey of emplaced IVS targets for QC purposes
XM
Miscellaneous
All other
Note that the measurement type code is the only alphanumeric field that has a limitation on the
number of characters.
www.naoc.org
20
Technology Committee
Geophysicist Qualifications for Advanced
Classification

ITRC was preparing a Tech-Reg entitled Geophysical
Classification for munitions response

NAOC asked to make recommendation for the contractor and
analyst qualifications section
www.naoc.org
21
Technology Committee
Geophysicist Qualifications for Advanced
Classification
Internal Tiger Team Convened:
Person
Kent Boler (Leader)
Jeff Leberfinger
John Breznick
Craig Murray
Steve Stacey
Dave Wright
Dean Keiswetter
www.naoc.org
Company
Matrix
Terranear
NAEVA Geophysics
Parsons
Arcadis
CH2M Hill
SAIC
22
Technology Committee
Geophysicist Qualifications for Advanced
Classification

Draft recommendations made by Technology “Tiger Team” and
discussed / revised with OSC (Hud Heaton)

Consensus reached

Final document submitted to NAOC President on November 1st
www.naoc.org
23
AC Geophysics Qualifications
Position

AC Data
Analyst Lead
AC Data
Collection
Lead
Munitions Response Advanced Classification (AC) Geophysical Qualifications
Education
Training2
 40 hours in applicable DGM
Software, including
Degree in:
Documented experience applying
o
Geosoft (or equivalent)
 geophysics,
3
advanced classification
o
Geosoft QA QC tools (or
 geology, or
1 year experience analyzing DGM
equivalent)
 a closely
data for MR projects
 16 hours of training on AC method
related
24 hours AC analysis under the direct
and mode of operation being
scientific or
supervision of a qualified AC Data
implemented
engineering
Analyst

8 hours AC analysis refresher
field5
training, if no AC analysis has
occurred in past year
Documented experience collecting
Degree in:
 8 hours training on each advanced
AC data4
 geophysics,
EMI sensor and mode of
1 year experience collecting DGM
 geology, or
operation being utilized
data for MR projects
 a closely
 8 hours AC data collection
24 hours in-field AC data collection
related
refresher training, if no AC data
under the direct supervision of a
scientific or
collection has occurred in past
qualified AC Instrument Operator
engineering
year
field5
Experience1





Certifications
Remarks
No applicable
certifications at
present
No applicable
certifications at
present
1. Experience qualifications follow individuals. Companies can acquire experience through joint ventures, teaming
arrangements, or mentor-protégé relationships in addition to self performance.
2. Training could be from hardware/software manufacturers, USACE or other agencies responsible for executing AC
projects, ESTCP, or equivalent in-house training as appropriate.
3. Experience could be from a Standardized Test Site, ESTCP demonstration project, pilot study, characterization project,
response action, remedial action, or an equivalent project or standardized test data set. Recommended minimum
experience consists of AC analysis on two projects or AC analysis of 2,500 targets using the proposed project
methodology.
4. Experience could be from a Standardized Test Site, ESTCP demonstration project, pilot study, characterization project,
response action, remedial action, or an equivalent project.
5. Or has documented AC experience prior to 2014.
www.naoc.org
24
Technology Committee
New Initiative for 2014
Geophysical Reporting Requirements (GRR)

Initiated by USACE-Huntsville (Elise Goggins)

Heard Ryan say current GRR incur significant costs

Want to explore this further in 2014 and consider potential revisions

Anticipate meeting in Huntsville in Winter / Spring
www.naoc.org
25
Technology Committee Contact
QUESTIONS ?
Chair, Technology Committee
John Allan
NAEVA Geophysics, Inc.
Office: 434-978-3187
JAllan@naevageophysics.com
www.naoc.org
26