This project's objective was to perform two Live Site Classification Demonstrations using advanced electromagnetic induction (EMI) sensors to perform Advanced Geophysical Classification (AGC). This is one of a series of Environmental Security Technology Certification Program (ESTCP) demonstrations of classification technologies for Munitions Response (MR). These demonstrations are designed to evaluate classification methodology at live munitions response sites. This project performed Live Site Demonstrations at the Former Southwestern Proving Ground (SWPG), AR and the Former Joliet Army Ammunition Plant (JOAAP), AR. The primary objective for these demonstrations was to gain experience with AGC technology. Additionally, each site presented unique challenges for the AGC process.
Two Advanced Electromagnetic Induction (EMI) sensors were used during these demonstrations: the Geometrics MetalMapper and the Naval Research Laboratory TEMTADS. Both systems are designed to enable classification of targets of interest (TOIs) using 3-dimensional transmitter and/or receiver coils. These systems have been proven at multiple ESTCP live-site demonstrations to be effective at discriminating between unexploded ordnance (UXO) and non-UXO items. The investigators operated the MetalMapper in the dynamic detection mode and the TEMTADs in both Dynamic and cued modes. Geosoft Oasis Montaj UX-Analyze software was used for all data processing and UXOLab was used to process and select targets from the dynamic data collected at SWPG.
At SWPG, approximately 1 acre of dynamic data were collected, and 2491 targets were selected for cued interrogation. No TOI were missed on the final classified and ranked list and approximately 87% of the clutter was rejected.
At JOAAP, approximately 2 acres of dynamic data were collected, and 1005 targets were selected for cued interrogation. Two classified and ranked lists were generated. The first missed no TOI, but had a clutter rejection rate of only 22%. The second, missed several TOI, with a clutter rejection rate of 65%.
The biggest cost drivers on these two sites, were terrain, vegetation, anomaly density and defined TOI.
Due to the time that has lapsed since the field work and the preparation of the report, several factors related to implementing AGC technology have changed. The primary change is that the International Organization for Standardization 17025 Department of Defense Advanced Geophysical Classification Program (DAGCAP) Accreditation is now required to perform AGC for the DoD.