Army Chemical Review presents professional information about Chemical Corps functions related to chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear, smoke, flame, and civil support operations.
Issue link: https://chemical.epubxp.com/i/759309
Army Chemical Review 20 the theater. In conjunction with combatant command and functional expert input, RDECOM FAST scientists reported trends to the community of interest while on tour in-theater. In 2009, ammonia nitrate was declared contraband in one host country, but ammonia nitrate was replaced with other fertilizers. This drove an effort to identify bulk fertilizer to determine if it was ammonium nitrate or another type of fer- tilizer. Faced with large bags of unknown, off-white powder, Soldiers often destroyed the bags, which negatively impact- ed the farmers who depended on the fertilizer. While there was a significant number of explosive ordnance disposal (EOD) personnel in-theater, the ammonium nitrate problem was far too extensive to be addressed by the assets available. The in-theater science and technology team issued an early recommendation for a simple screening capability to empow- er the dismounted patrol as it performed search and control point missions. That recommendation was mirrored by a concurrent in-theater procurement action with the goal of providing a commercial, off-the-shelf (COTS) screening ca- pability to dismounted infantrymen who encountered bulk precursor materials during routine searches. EOD units in-theater were very experienced with COTS colorimetric kits. The ECBC liaison officer to MSCoE obtained various COTS kits, and requirements writers and training develop- ers jointly reviewed them. A colorimetric working group from the Army technology objective team had considered three different approaches to a colorimetric capability. Those approaches were the sub- ject of the first in-process review of the Army technology objective (Detection of Unknown Bulk Explosives). At the meeting, U.S. Navy research laboratory personnel briefed one COTS approach; the U.S. Army Armaments Research, Development, and Engineering Center personnel briefed another COTS approach; and ECBC personnel briefed a de- velopmental prototype approach that leveraged the design principles of the M256 Chemical Agent Detection Kit, which is commonly used as an unmasking tool. Joint Improvised– Threat Defeat Organization personnel briefed a project characterizing the performance of the various COTS colori- metric kits used in the theater. Responding to a joint urgent operational needs statement, MSCoE, with the support of ECBC, prepared a concept of operation/concept of employment for the COTS product that was procured to meet the operational need. The concept of operation/concept of employment addressed the capabili- ties and limitations of the specific COTS solution, provided some specific health and safety recommendations, and rec- ommended a technique for taking a sample and conducting field screening. A user survey was prepared and forwarded to the RDECOM FAST member on tour with the combatant command with the intent to learn about user perceptions of the COTS kit. Using the input from the combatant com- mand, information from the survey was prepared to support the requirements investigation. At this point, there was no agreement that an enduring requirement was needed or if this was a requirement solely limited to the current theater of operations. During this period, the subject matter experts at MSCoE were attending weekly updates on the counter IED problem. This included worldwide threat briefs. There was significant worldwide activity, but it seemed clear that it was not going to be a localized problem. The U.S. Army Maneuver Center of Excellence (MCoE) and MSCoE—leveraging the Natick Soldier Center, MCoE, and the U.S. Special Operations Command liaison officers— administered a survey to noncommissioned officers attend- ing professional development courses in the combat engi- neer, military police, CBRN, and infantry career fields. The goal of the survey was to determine attributes for an endur- ing solution. The survey participants were all recent combat veterans who had experienced the IED problem in the field, and many had experience with COTS products. The results of the surveys revealed that human factors, the training burden, the weight and size of the colorimetric kits, and the ability to quickly change the kit in response to a change in threat were key considerations. The design approaches briefed during the Army technol- ogy objective (Detection of Unknown Bulk Explosives) in- process review, plus lessons learned from the deployment of various COTS design approaches, were the basis for the de- sign of a series of two battle laboratory experiments intend- ed to promote understanding of an enduring requirement by hands-on manipulation of the ideas for a material approach. In-house chemical engineering and rapid prototyping capa- bilities were used to fabricate a prototype kit design. The first prototype was based on input from the field, experience with COTS kits, and guidance from MCoE and MSCoE. Mili- tary Utility Assessment (MUA) I was a tabletop event con- ducted in controlled (indoor) conditions, building upon the results of the surveys conducted at Fort Benning, Georgia, and Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri. Actual explosives and ex- plosive precursors were used with the intent of understand- ing human interface and training requirements. Both COTS and developmental prototypes were employed. Results from that experiment populated a straw man requirements docu- ment and provided input for a cost-benefit analysis process. Input from Soldier operators optimized the design ap- proach. In addition, ECBC chemists quickly designed a train- ing device that would show similar results on a colorimetric kit as homemade explosive material, but was safe enough to store in a supply room and transport by common carrier. MUA II was conducted in the context of two scenarios. One was a search scenario to identify unknown bulk materials and was conducted at a remote notional field laboratory un- der ambient (cold) temperature conditions. The other was a screening scenario to look for explosive residue (near trace) on exterior vehicle surfaces at an infantry control point. While not stated, one goal for the experimentation pro- cess was to identify, develop, and demonstrate technology applications that informed personnel of the requirements process and enabled effective and affordable capabilities for the Soldier. Another key intent was to drive down the devel- opment risk for an enduring solution.