Congress Considering UXO Technology Transfer Initiatives
The DoD would also be required to submit a new report to Congress (no later than 01 February 2009) on UXO technology investments and technology transition. The report will summarize technology investments and activities taken to transition technologies and train operators on emerging technologies. The report to Congress will also be required to identify impediments to technology transfer, provide a list of technologies transferred to private industry, and list the activities undertaken to raise public awareness on UXO.
It will be interesting to see if these new changes (if adopted) have any impact on the technology transfer process for UXO related technologies developed and funded by DoD. For the past decade or more, the technology transfer process has been a significant challenge for DoD. Only a few technologies have actually made it through the DoD's development process and actually transition successfully to the commercial market place.
Use the download link below to view the language from Section 314 of HR 5658.
Interesting article on the changes to funding that Congress is consider w/ respect to the RDT&E budget allocations for UXO related technologies. As I see it (based upon my 15+ years in the UXO R&D industry) that unless Congress provides the funding to a "new" source to allocate it, I'm afraid we will end up with the same results (i.e. little to no technologies actully being transferred).
Take the "plus up" last year for example that was provided to ESTCP to demonstrate "innovative" UXO technologies "at actual MMRP sites" they needed a "plus up" for this. One would think that would be going on all along? I think if you peel back the funding allocations for that "plus up" (I think it was in the neighborhood of $5M) that you will find that the majority of it went to the organizations already being funded to continue their "science experiments" just at another location. Minimal to no measurable impact on actually making those technologies available for use by industry.
The bottom line is that little no no technologies have been transferred despite the millions spent and the "research to date" has resulted in minimal impacts to the performance results of UXO cleanup. Too much focus has been on detection and discrimination technologies and other parts of the equation (planning, data management, digging, recovery, and disposal) have been largely ignored. Take the planning stage for example imagine the impact that a simple system or database that automated the Explosive Safety Submission (ESS) process would have on the industry. An ESS could be developed in a day vs weeks, then emailed to the respective Boards for approval through a secure system and changes / amendments could then be easily tracked. The DDESB could make them available to other stakeholders and the interested public. There is no reason I can see why they should not be available on-line - with the exception of magazine storage locations (why tell everyone where explosives are kept). This is just one example. I know, the DoD (through the DESCIM - Defense Environmental Security Corporate Information Management Program) effort attempted this years ago and failed but DESCIM failed in every other aspect so don't blame the concept, blame the executor.
It will be interesting to see how this language in the DAA impacts future funding allocations (if at all) or if it just means more funding for the "same old boys (and girls) clubs" and more "science experiments". If say just $1M was spent to help automate the processes involved in a typical UXO project,it would go a long way in streamlining the time it takes to execute and manage a UXO project. Streamlining the process reduces man-hours and drives down costs.
Thank you UXOInfo.com for allowing me a platform to express my opinion and for attempting to increase data sharing within the industry. Please keep up the good work.
Regards,
Richard