Technical Report Demonstration of Advanced Geophysics and Classification Methods on Munitions Response Sites - East Fork Valley Range Complex Former Camp Hale ESTCP Project MR-201230 April 2016 Ms. Victoria Kantsios Mr. Brian Helmlinger Ms. Cheryl Gannon URS Group/AECOM Distribution Statement A FINAL REPORT Demonstration of Advanced Geophysics and Classification Methods on Munitions Response Sites East Fork Valley Range Complex Former Camp Hale, CO ESTCP Project Number: MR-201230 URS Project Number: 39455683 April 2016 URS Group, Inc. Form Approved REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE OMB No. 0704-0188 The public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing the burden, to the Department of Defense, Executive Services and Communications Directorate (0704-0188). Respondents should be aware that notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information if it does not display a currently valid OMB control number. PLEASE DO NOT RETURN YOUR FORM TO THE ABOVE ORGANIZATION. 1. REPORT DATE (DD-MM-YYYY) 2. REPORT TYPE 3. DATES COVERED (From - To) 12-06-2013 Final Report May - November 2014 4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE 5a. CONTRACT NUMBER Demonstration of Advanced Geophysics and Classification Methods on W912HQ-12-C-0010 Munitions Response Sites 5b. GRANT NUMBER East Fork Valley Range Complex Former Camp Hale, CO 5c. PROGRAM ELEMENT NUMBER 6. AUTHOR(S) 5d. PROJECT NUMBER V. Kantsios, C. Gannon, B. Helmlinger MR-201230 5e. TASK NUMBER 5f. WORK UNIT NUMBER 7. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION URS Group, Incorporated REPORT NUMBER 2450 Crystal Drive, Suite 500 Arlington, VA 22202 9. SPONSORING/MONITORING AGENCY NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 10. SPONSOR/MONITOR'S ACRONYM(S) Environmental Security Technology Certification Program (ESTCP) Office ESTCP 4800 Mark Center Drive, Suite 17D08 Alexandria, VA 22350-3605 11. SPONSOR/MONITOR'S REPORT NUMBER(S) 12. DISTRIBUTION/AVAILABILITY STATEMENT Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. 13. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES 14. ABSTRACT This document serves as the Environmental Security Technology Certification Program (ESTCP) Demonstration Report for the demonstration of advanced geophysics and classification technologies on the Former Camp Hale, East Fork Valley Range Complex Munitions Response Site. This project is one in a series of projects funded by ESTCP to use advanced geophysical sensors and test data analysis tools for anomaly classification. 15. SUBJECT TERMS 16. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF: 17. LIMITATION OF 18. NUMBER 19a. NAME OF RESPONSIBLE PERSON a. REPORT b. ABSTRACT c. THIS PAGE ABSTRACT OF V. Kantsios PAGES Unclassified Unclassified Unclassified UL 19b. TELEPHONE NUMBER (Include area code) 58 (703) 418-3030 Standard Form 298 (Rev. 8/98) Prescribed by ANSI Std. Z39.18 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................. 1 1.1 BACKGROUND .................................................................................................... 1 1.2 OBJECTIVE OF THE DEMONSTRATION......................................................... 1 1.3 REGULATORY DRIVER...................................................................................... 1 2.0 TECHNOLOGY ................................................................................................................. 3 2.1 TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION .......................................................................... 3 2.1.1 Geophysical Data Collection ...................................................................... 3 2.1.2 Classification Methods................................................................................ 4 2.2 ADVANTAGES AND LIMITATIONS OF THE TECHNOLOGY...................... 5 2.2.1 TEMTADS Data Processing....................................................................... 5 3.0 PERFORMANCE OBJECTIVES ...................................................................................... 6 3.1 OBJECTIVE: SITE SPECIFIC BACKGROUND ................................................. 7 3.1.1 Metric.......................................................................................................... 7 3.1.2 Data Requirements...................................................................................... 7 3.1.3 Success Criteria........................................................................................... 7 3.2 OBJECTIVE: ALONG-LINE MEASUREMENT SPACING ............................... 7 3.2.1 Metric.......................................................................................................... 8 3.2.2 Data Requirements...................................................................................... 8 3.2.3 Success Criteria........................................................................................... 8 3.3 OBJECTIVE: COMPLETE COVERAGE OF THE DEMONSTRATION SITE . 8 3.3.1 Metric.......................................................................................................... 8 3.3.2 Data Requirements...................................................................................... 8 3.3.3 Success Criteria........................................................................................... 8 3.4 OBJECTIVE: IVS RESULTS ................................................................................ 8 3.4.1 Metric.......................................................................................................... 8 3.4.2 Data Requirements...................................................................................... 9 3.4.3 Success Criteria........................................................................................... 9 3.5 OBJECTIVE: CUED INTERROGATION OF ANOMALIES.............................. 9 3.5.1 Metric.......................................................................................................... 9 3.5.2 Data Requirements...................................................................................... 9 3.5.3 Success Criteria........................................................................................... 9 3.6 OBJECTIVE: DETECTION OF ALL TARGETS OF INTEREST....................... 9 3.6.1 Metric.......................................................................................................... 9 3.6.2 Data Requirements...................................................................................... 9 3.6.3 Success Criteria........................................................................................... 9 3.7 OBJECTIVE: MAXIMIZE CORRECT CLASSIFICATION OF TARGETS OF INTEREST........................................................................................................ 9 3.7.1 Metric........................................................................................................ 10 3.7.2 Data Requirements.................................................................................... 10 3.7.3 Success Criteria......................................................................................... 10 3.8 OBJECTIVE: MAXIMIZE CORRECT CLASSIFICATION OF NON- TARGETS OF INTEREST................................................................................... 10 3.8.1 Metric........................................................................................................ 10 ii 3.8.2 Data Requirements.................................................................................... 10 3.8.3 Success Criteria......................................................................................... 10 3.9 OBJECTIVE: SPECIFICATION OF NO-DIG THRESHOLD ........................... 10 3.9.1 Metric........................................................................................................ 10 3.9.2 Data Requirements.................................................................................... 10 3.9.3 Success Criteria......................................................................................... 10 3.10 OBJECTIVE: MINIMIZE NUMBER OF ANOMALIES THAT CANNOT BE ANALYZED......................................................................................................... 11 3.10.1 Metric........................................................................................................ 11 3.10.2 Data Requirements.................................................................................... 11 3.10.3 Success Criteria......................................................................................... 11 3.11 OBJECTIVE: CORRECT ESTIMATION OF TARGET PARAMETERS......... 11 3.11.1 Metric........................................................................................................ 11 3.11.2 Data Requirements.................................................................................... 11 3.11.3 Success Criteria......................................................................................... 11 3.12 OBJECTIVE: EXCAVATION OF ANOMALIES .............................................. 11 3.12.1 Metric.......................................................................................................