CGF 6.5 (November 2014)

November 2014Volume 6, Issue 5

www.CGF-kmi.com

Homeland Security, Maritime Protection & CBRN Response

Protective Coatings O Biometrics CBRN Decontamination O EO/IR

Solutions Provider

Mark BorkowskiAssistant Commissioner Office of Technology Innovation & AcquisitionU.S. Customs & Border Protection

U.S. CoaSt GUard ProGram UPdateS

Who’s Who SponsorshipsDetailed Organization Profiles

Command Profile SponsorshipsQ&A with Top-Level Command Leaders

Product ProfilesHighlight Your Product in the Military Niche Market

Business ProfilesCustom Materials for Custom Audiences

Industry Event ReportsDesigned Specifically for Your Industry-Focused Event

Resource GuidesProgram Management Updates; Contracts Guides; Products and Services Catalogs; Reference Guides

Posters/Poster SponsorshipsAgency Timelines; Command/Organization Anniversary Timelines; Message Posters

CDs/DVDsStrategically Position Your Promotional CDs or DVDs with a Tip in Disc Carrier

KMI Media Group offersADDITIONAL PRODUCTS and

SERVICE OPPORTUNITIES

To learn about advertising opportunities, contact Conni Kerrigan at [email protected] or 301.670.5700 ext. 111

Cover / Q&AFeatures

Targeted circulation reaches decision-makers at all levels of the U.S. Coast Guard and U.S Customs and Border Protection with laser-focused content on acquisition, technologies and solutions.

Mark BorkowskiAssistant Commissioner

Office of Technology Innovation & Acquisition

U.S. Customs and Border Protection

16

Departments Industry Interview2 Editor’s PErsPEctivE3 Nav NotEs14 oN thE horizoN27 rEsourcE cENtEr

LuciaN wiLLiaMsPresidentDenso USA LP

November 2014Volume 6, Issue 5U.S. CoaSt gUard & Border SeCUrity

28

“Overall, in development

and deployment, although the total dollars

have actually gone down,

we were able to move

money to accelerate

Texas deployments, which have

become a high priority.”

— Mark Borkowski

21BioMEtricsSearching for the characteristics that allow identification, including a person’s face, fingerprint or the unique pattern of the iris of an eye.By Scott NaNce

23EyEs oN thE BordErSurveillance systems used to secure borders, coastlines and waterways have become remarkably more capable in recent years.By Peter BuxBaum

25GEttiNG dEcoNWith a variety of technology options, selecting the right response for each incident can be a challenge.By William murray

10

4ProtEctioN iN LayErsMarine paints and coatings are a central component of the Coast Guard’s endless fight against the ravages of the harsh saltwater environment.By chriStiaN Bourge

For thE FuturEThe Coast Guard’s Acquisition Directorate manages major and non-major acquisition projects and logistics support within three domains—surface; aviation; and command, control, communications, computers, intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance.By coaSt guard acquiSitioN office

Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS) U.S. Customs and Border Protection’s (CBP) Office of Field Operations is responsible for scanning passengers and cargo transiting across the border using any port of entry—air, land and sea. CBP border agents routinely perform immigration inspections as well the interdiction of contraband, including nuclear and radiological materials.

CBP’s Operational Field Testing Division (OFTD), under the Office of Internal Affairs (OIA), conducts covert operations to test capabilities for detecting and interdicting nuclear and radiological materials at ports of entry and checkpoints, with some support provided by DHS’s Domestic Nuclear Detection Office (DNDO).

Thanks to congressional action in the form of the Security and Accountability for Every Port Act of 2006 (SAFE Port Act), a plan was enacted for OFTD to conduct covert operations at the nation’s 22 busiest seaports in fiscal year 2007/2008 to test the interdiction process. Based on results of those actions, and as part of the Global Nuclear Detection Architecture Implementation Plan, CBP and DNDO were instructed to conduct at least one joint covert operation each year to maintain and improve the processes in place to detect and respond to a detection of nuclear and radiological materials. OFTD conducted 144 covert operations at 86 locations between 2006 and 2013.

Between 1995 and 2013, CBP invested more than $2.5 billion to acquire, deploy and maintain radiation detection equipment; provide training; and conduct both overt and covert tests of the equip-ment to assess the equipment’s effectiveness. OFTD’s budget for covert operations was $1 million for FY09 through FY13 to test CBP capabilities in several areas, including radiation and nuclear detection.

A recent Government Accountability Office report on DHS’s processes concluded that, “To help ensure that resources for covert operations provide reasonable assurance that efforts to detect and inter-dict nuclear and radiological material smuggled across the border are working as intended and appro-priately targeting the most critical materials, locations and detection technologies, we recommend that the Secretary of Homeland Security conduct or use a risk assessment to inform the department’s priorities—related to such decisions as test locations, materials and equipment—for covert operations at U.S. checkpoints and ports of entry in air, land and sea environments.”

While concurring with the report’s recommendations, DHS also explained that a pending transfer of the testing program from OIA to the Office of Intelligence and Investigative Liaison (OIIL) would add greater depth and synergy.

Dedicated to Those Who Are Always Ready

EditorialEditor-In-ChiefJeff mcKaughan [email protected]

Managing Editorharrison donnelly [email protected]

Copy EditorsCrystal Jones [email protected] Jonathan magin [email protected]

CorrespondentsJ.B. Bissell • Christian Bourge • Peter Buxbaum Henry Canaday • Cheryl Gerber • Steve Hirsh William Murray • Scott Nance • Karen Thuermer

art & designArt DirectorJennifer owers [email protected]

Ads and Materials ManagerJittima Saiwongnuan [email protected]

Senior Graphic DesignerScott morris [email protected]

Graphic Designers andrea herrera [email protected] Paquette [email protected]

kMi Media GroupChief Executive OfficerJack Kerrigan [email protected]

Publisher and Chief Financial Officerconstance Kerrigan [email protected]

Editor-In-ChiefJeff mcKaughan [email protected]

Controllergigi castro [email protected]

Trade Show Coordinatorholly foster [email protected]

operations, circulation & ProductionOperations AdministratorBob Lesser [email protected]

Circulation & Marketing AdministratorDuane Ebanks [email protected]

CirculationBarbara Gill [email protected] Woods [email protected]

Data SpecialistRaymer Villanueva [email protected]

a Proud Member of:

subscription informationU.S. Coast Guard & Border Security

iSSN 2152-6990 is published six times a year by KMI Media Group. All Rights Reserved. Reproduction without permission is

strictly forbidden. © Copyright 2014. U.S. Coast Guard & Border Security is free to qualified

members of the U.S. military, employees of the U.S. gov-ernment and non-U.S. foreign service based in the U.S.

all others: $75 per year.foreign: $159 per year.

corporate officesKmi media group

15800 Crabbs Branch Way, Suite 300Rockville, MD 20855-2604 USA

Telephone: (301) 670-5700Fax: (301) 670-5701

Web: www.cgf-kmi.com

U.S. Coast Guard & Border SecurityVolume 6, Issue 5 • November 2014

editor’S PerSPeCtiVe

KMI MEDIA GROUP LEADERSHIP MAGAZINES AND WEBSITES

www.GCT-kmi.com

UAS Leader

Col. Tim BaxterU.S. Army Project Manager UAS Project Office

Technology & Intel for the Maneuver Warfighter

May 2014Volume 5, Issue 3

www.GCT-kmi.com

Rapidly Deployable ISR O Tactical UAS O Enduring REFArmy Aviation O Wheeled Vehicles O Ammo

SPECIAL SECTION:MANNED-UNMANNED TEAMING

Ground Combat & Tactical ISR

www.M2VA-kmi.com

Military Medical & Veterans Affairs

Forum

www.GIF-kmi.com

Geospatial Intelligence Forum

www.MT2-kmi.com

Military Training Technology

www.MAE-kmi.com

Military AdvancedEducation

www.NPEO-kmi.com

Navy Air/Sea PEO Forum

www.MIT-kmi.com

Military Information Technology

www.SOTECH-kmi.com

SOCOM Leader

Adm. Bill H. McRaven

CommanderSOCOM

Diver Gear O 3-D Training O Protective Gear Mulltinational Partnerships

May 2014 Volume 12, Issue 4

www.SOTECH-kmi.com

World’s Largest Distributed Special Ops Magazine

Program Management Updates

SOCOM2014

Special Operations Technology

www.MLF-kmi.com

Reverse Auctions O Defense Transportation O Afghanistan RetrogradeILS O Supply Chain Efficiencies O DMSMS O Senior Logisticians

The Publication of Record for the Military Logistics Community

Resource Aligner

Vice Adm. William A. “Andy” Brown Deputy CommanderU.S. Transportation Command

SPECIAL PULL-OUT SUPPLEMENTUSTRANSCOM

www.MLF-kmi.com

November/December 2013Volume 7, Issue 10

Exclusive Interview with:

GAIL JORGENSONAcquisition Director USTRANSCOM

Military Logistics Forum

www.CGF-kmi.com

U.S. Coast Guard & Border Security

Jeff McKaughaneditor

www.CGF-kmi.com2 | CGF 6.5

Coast Guard Incident Management and

Incident Action Planning Software System

The USCG has identified countless lessons learned, after action reports and memos documenting the need for improved information management during an inci-dent—for example, the reports developed as a result of the Deepwater Horizon incident.

The Coast Guard has identified the implementation of an incident management and incident action plan-ning (IAP) software system as the solution. Some opera-tional units have purchased single-unit licenses for these types of software solutions; the goal of this program is to institutionalize it to an enterprise wide standard across the Coast Guard.

The fundamental goal of the solicitation is to seek a commercial-off-the-shelf software solution to support all functional areas of Coast Guard incident management, IAP development and incident preparedness activities. The system must be able to manage at least 100 concur-rent active incidents across the Coast Guard enterprise at one time.

Compiled by KMI Media Group staffNaV NoteS

Transition to Practice Program

Through the Department of Homeland Security’s Transition to Practice (TTP) program, cybersecurity technologies developed at Sandia National Laboratories—and at other federal labs—now stand a better chance of finding their way into the real world.

Sandia National Laboratories’ Daniel Soh recently provided the Department of Homeland Security’s Mike Pozmantier an overview of the continuous variable quantum key distribution lab.

The innovative TTP program, spearheaded by the depart-ment’s Science and Technology Directorate (S&T), helps move federally funded cybersecurity technologies into broader use. Getting research discoveries and new technologies over the so-called “valley of death”—the gap between early, promising research on one side and technology in use on the other—is a dire need in the national lab community.

“Moving technologies from the laboratory into actual practice is difficult,” said Steve Hurd, a cybersecurity researcher who helps lead Sandia’s TTP efforts. He said one major reason is that technologies that seem to work in the lab might need fine-tuning or further upgrades in the field.

“So TTP is an inventive attempt to help all the labs improve in this area,” Hurd continued. “It’s paying dividends already by opening doors that will get new innovative cyberdefense technologies from Sandia and other laboratories into the hands of industry, academia and other research institutions that can really use them.”

Coast Guard Flies UAS in Arctic SkiesSoaring high above the shifting ice and frigid waters of the Arctic Ocean, a silent

sentinel patrolled the skies above the Coast Guard Cutter Healy during its journey to the Arctic this summer. While buoys and submersibles collected data from the briny deep, an unmanned aircraft system (UAS) kept vigil in the frosty air.

Scientists at the Coast Guard Research and Development Center (RDC), based in New London, Conn., have a long history of studying UAS for their potential to improve Coast Guard operations. This summer, they teamed with researchers from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and continued their work by deploying a Puma all-environment UAS from the Healy to support their oil-in-ice exercise and evaluate the system’s abilities in the extreme environment of the Arctic.

“UAS technology is already used by NOAA for gathering data and collecting imagery, but this system has rarely been tested in the Arctic,” said Todd Jacobs, a NOAA representative traveling aboard the Healy. “In 2013, we launched a Puma AE from the Healy and tested its flight endurance in cold weather. This year, we developed procedures for landing the system directly onto the flight deck, something that had never before been done on a Coast Guard vessel.”

UAS operators with Aerovironment, designers of the Puma AE, recorded a successful flight deck landing in mid-August and chalked up two additional landings later in the month using a net system custom-built for mounting to the Healy’s bow.

“The Arctic is a cold, dangerous place, and there’s always some risk any time a smallboat crew gets underway,” said Bill Jankowski, an RDC program lead traveling aboard the Healy. “Having the ability to land a UAS aboard a vessel rather than in the water is important because it means crew members don’t have to be put at unnecessary danger by going out to retrieve it.”

The successful landing of the Puma AE aboard the Healy didn’t downplay its role in the RDC’s Oil in Ice Project. Operators also used the system’s infrared and electro-optical camera to provide video of a simulated oil spill and relay data to NOAA’s Emergency Response Management Application, a database used by the Coast Guard and its partner agencies to share information during response efforts. Ease-of-operation and versatility combined with the stealth provided by its near-silence and small size could make the Puma AE or similar UAS technologies useful tools for nearly any Coast Guard mission.

“UAS can support anything from migrant and drug interdiction operations to search and rescue, fisheries enforcement or ice recon. It’s a technology with a lot of potential to help the Coast Guard in the Arctic,” said Jankowski. “These unmanned systems are never going to replace our rescue swimmers or our boat crews, but they show a lot of promise in enhancing Coast Guard missions wherever we serve.”

By Petty Officer 1st Class Shawn Eggert

www.CGF-kmi.com CGF 6.5 | 3

The Coast Guard’s Acquisition Directorate manages major and non-major acquisition projects and logistics support within three domains—surface; aviation; and command, control, communications, computers, intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance—to provide operational commanders with the ships, boats, aircraft and systems to meet the service’s current and future mission requirements.

These program updates have been provided to U.S. Coast Guard & Border Protection by the Coast Guard’s Acquisition Office.

Recapitalizing coast guaRd assets to meet mission RequiRements

SURFACE PROJECTS

National Security Cutter (NSC) The Coast Guard is acquiring eight Legend-class national

security cutters to recapitalize the service’s 1960s-vintage 378-foot high-endurance cutters and meet its ongoing requirement for cut-ters with the endurance, seakeeping and multimission capabilities to conduct extended and remote independent operations. NSCs are designed to execute law enforcement, search and rescue and homeland security missions. The NSC’s operational requirements include a sustained speed of 28 knots, a range of 12,000 nautical miles, an endurance of 60 to 90 days and the capacity to accom-modate up to 148 people.

The first three NSCs—Bertholf, Waesche and Stratton—have been commissioned and are fully operational. All are homeported in Alameda, Calif. The fourth NSC, Hamilton, was delivered to the Coast Guard on September 15, 2014, and will be commissioned at its new homeport, Charleston, S.C., in December 2014. The fifth NSC, James, is under construction and scheduled to be delivered in 2015. The production contract for the sixth NSC, Munro, was awarded April 30, 2013, and the keel will be laid in October 2014. The production contract for the seventh NSC, Kimball, was awarded March 31, 2014. An option for long lead time materials for the eighth NSC, Midgett, was exercised June 30, 2014.

Offshore Patrol Cutter (OPC)The Coast Guard has initiated the offshore patrol cutter project

to bridge the capability gap between the NSC and the fast response cutter by replacing its 210-foot and 270-foot medium endurance cutters built between the 1960s and 1980s with ships capable of performing the Coast Guard’s missions more effectively. The OPC’s requirements include increased range and endurance; larger flight decks; state-of-the-market command and control electronics; air and surface search radar and target classification sensors; the ability to accommodate aircraft and small boats; and the adoption of tech-nologies to reduce environmental impact while underway.

The Coast Guard is pursuing a two-phase strategy for acquiring the OPC, with preliminary and contract design followed by detail design and construction. On February 11, 2014, the Coast Guard

awarded three firm fixed-price contracts for the first phase to Bol-linger Shipyards Lockport LLC (Lockport, La.), Eastern Shipbuild-ing Group Inc. (Panama City, Fla.), and General Dynamics, Bath Iron Works (Bath, Maine). At the conclusion of the Phase I perfor-mance period, one contractor will be selected for detail design and construction under Phase II. The Phase II selection decision to a single design will be made after the designs are sufficiently mature to allow industry to submit fixed-price options for ship construc-tion. The Phase II award will include options for production of the lead OPC and up to eight follow-on cutters. In addition, there is a firm fixed-price re-pricing option for two additional cutters.

The phased acquisition strategy implemented by the Coast Guard promotes greater cost visibility for the service and incen-tivizes cost control within industry by maintaining a competitive environment.

The Coast Guard plans to acquire 25 OPCs. The OPC project is the largest shipbuilding project the Coast Guard has undertaken in terms of total dollar amount.

Fast Response Cutter (FRC)The Coast Guard is acquiring 58 Sentinel-class fast response

cutters with enhanced operational capabilities and interoperabil-ity; stern launch and recovery of the over-the-horizon IV cutter boat; improved sea keeping; and enhanced crew habitability. The FRC will assume many of the missions carried out by the Coast Guard’s legacy 110-foot Island-class patrol boats.

The FRCs bring additional capabilities to port, waterway and coastal security; fishery patrols; search and rescue; and other mis-sions performed by the older patrol boats. FRCs have a top speed of more than 28 knots, are capable of operating independently for five days at sea, can be underway for 2,500 hours per year and have accommodations for a crew of 22.

To date, the Coast Guard has commissioned 10 of the 154-foot FRCs. Twenty more are on order.

Mission Effectiveness Project (MEP)The Coast Guard recently completed its Mission Effectiveness

Project as part of its strategy to manage maintenance costs and reduce lost operational days of the medium endurance cutters


and patrol boats awaiting replacement through the FRC and OPC projects.

Made necessary by the degraded reliability of older cutters, the MEP was designed to prevent unscheduled maintenance by upgrad-ing equipment and systems most likely to fail. During the MEP process, the 270-foot Famous-class WMECs, the 210-foot Reliance-class WMECs and the 110-foot Island-class WPBs received new equipment and repairs to increase the reliability and performance of major ship systems.

MEP availabilities included the renewal of cutter decks, living quarters and engineering systems; replacement of tanks, piping and electrical wiring; replacement of hull plating on 210-foot WMECs and 110-foot WPBs; and enhancement of other items, such as refrigerators and air conditioning units, to improve habitability. The refurbishment work was coordinated by the Legacy Sustainment Support Unit at the Coast Guard Yard, Curtis Bay, Md.

The Coast Guard completed the last MEP availabilities for the 110-foot Island-class patrol boats in 2012. The overall project was completed in September 2014 with the departure of Coast Guard Cutter Mohawk, the last 270-foot medium endurance cutter to undergo major system enhancements, from the Coast Guard Yard.

In-Service Vessel SustainmentFollowing on the successful WMEC MEP at the Coast Guard

Yard, the service has initiated a project to perform life-cycle event

vessel repair availabilities, including mission effectiveness projects, midlife availabilities and service life extension projects across the Coast Guard’s legacy vessel fleet. The project is designed to ensure in-service vessels meet or exceed their design service life through recapitalizing hull, mechanical, electrical and electronic systems that have been identified as the highest contributors to mainte-nance costs and decreasing operational availability.

Engineering and planning work has already begun in advance of the planned arrival of 140-foot Bay-class icebreaking tugs, Coast Guard Cutter Eagle and 225-foot Juniper-class seagoing buoy ten-ders at the Coast Guard Yard. Engineering work for the 47-foot motor life boat fleet is also planned to start in fiscal year 2015.

Response Boat-Medium (RB-M)The Response Boat-Medium is replacing the service’s 41-foot

and nonstandard utility boats as the centerpiece of the Coast Guard’s recapitalized shore-based response forces. The 45-foot RB-M is equipped with state-of-the-art marine technology, includ-ing waterjet propulsion and integrated electronics that allow greater control from the pilot house. The RB-M delivers boat crews more rapidly and with greater agility to rescue target locations, as well as providing boat crews with a sophisticated electronic command and control suite able to track and intercept targets in all weather condi-tions. The RB-M also is a safer platform than the boats it replaces, having been designed to decrease crew fatigue on extended patrols.

They’re coming for you. Just hold on. The deck was under your feet. Then it wasn’t. Sky, water – it’s all black. It’s been 20 hours, but now the sun’s up. They’re coming. Stay focused. Check your equipment again: seals are good – no leaking from the gloves or zipper, rescue light secure in pocket, pillow inflated. Stay warm. Take some breaths into the suit’s mouthpiece. It’ll circulate warm air to your fingers and toes. They should be close by now. Wait. There. A ship! It’s getting closer. They’re dropping the rescue boat. They’re coming. You’re going home.

SURVIVING THE LONGEST NIGHT

INCREASE THE ODDS OF GOING [email protected] I Riika Jorgensen 757-675-9367

The warming feature of the I950 Thermashield™ 24+ was tested with the suit, however, it is not part of the certification from the U.S. Coast Guard or the third-party test laboratory, Underwriters Laboratories.

®


The Coast Guard plans to acquire 174 RB-Ms. Today, more than 162 RB-Ms have been delivered to stations around the country. Deliveries are scheduled to continue through early 2015.

Cutter Boats: Over-the-Horizon (OTH) IV and Long Range Interceptor (LRI) II

The Cutter Boats project includes the 7-meter over-the-hori-zon IV and the 11-meter long range interceptor II. The project will supply each NSC with two OTH-IVs and one LRI-II, as well as delivering cutter boats for other Coast Guard platforms, including the Sentinel-class FRC. The new cutter boats, with speeds up to 42 knots, extend the mission reach of their host cutters, interdicting go-fast targets and delivering Coast Guard boarding teams.

The OTH-IV, with accommodations for five, including a crew of three and a two-member boarding team, is designed to inter-cept and inspect vessels of interest during counter-drug patrols. The Coast Guard used an innovative acquisition strategy for the OTH-IV, selecting the winner from a “boat-off” of four competing designs. The Coast Guard may procure 101 OTH-IVs, including additional boats for U.S. Customs and Border Protection and the U.S. Navy. To date, 39 OTH-IVs have been ordered for NSC and FRC classes. Twenty-two OTH-IVs have been delivered to date, including 13 to the FRC and nine to the NSC fleet.

The powerful LRI-II, driven by twin marine diesel engines and water jet propulsors, is capable of mounting high-speed chases in pursuit of fast-moving targets far from the host cutter. Each LRI can accommodate 15 people. An improved command, control and com-munications suite helps the boat crews stay in contact with their cutter, Coast Guard aircraft and other assets during operations, par-ticularly migrant interdiction. The lead LRI-II was delivered to the Coast Guard in February 2013 and completed operational testing in June 2013, during which time it played a critical role in an interdic-tion of illegal drugs at sea. Following that testing, the LRI-II was approved for full-rate production. The first production LRI-II was delivered to Coast Guard Cutter Stratton in July 2014. The Coast Guard plans to procure up to 10 LRI-IIs.

Response Boat-Small (RB-S) II The Coast Guard developed the Response Boat-Small to

provide additional maritime safety and security platforms after the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. The first 25-foot Defender-class RB-S arrived in May 2002, and the service acquired approximately 300. In 2011, the Coast Guard began to recapitalize the legacy RB-S class, which is approaching the end of its 10-year service life with a new procurement, designated RB-S II.

The Coast Guard plans to procure as many as 500 RBS-IIs to replace the Defender-class, including as many as 20 boats for CBP and 10 for the Navy. To date, the Coast Guard has ordered 115 RB-S IIs and 100 hulls have been placed into service at Coast Guard small-boat stations around the United States.

AVIATION PROJECTS

HC-130H/J Long-Range Surveillance AircraftThe recapitalization of the Coast Guard’s long-range surveil-

lance aircraft fleet will enable aircrews to perform maritime patrols more effectively. The Coast Guard currently operates HC-130H Her-cules and HC-130J Super Hercules aircraft, which perform a wide

range of missions, including search and rescue, heavy air transport and law enforcement.

Coast Guard HC-130Js are equipped with a belly-mounted surface search radar, electro-optical/infrared sensor and a mission operator station installed on the flight deck. The Coast Guard has received delivery of six HC-130Js to date, and three HC-130Js are scheduled to be delivered in 2015. Following acceptance, each aircraft will undergo a missionization process to install systems, sensors and capabilities necessary to perform a broad set of Coast Guard missions. The Coast Guard has also received funding for two additional missionized aircraft (HC-130Js 10 and 11) and is working closely with the U.S. Air Force to schedule the acquisition of these new assets. Since its introduction into the Coast Guard fleet, HC-130Js have supported Coast Guard mobility and enhanced the ser-vice’s capability to perform search and rescue and drug and migrant interdiction missions.

As directed by the National Defense Authorization Act for FY14, the Coast Guard is moving ahead with the planned transfer of seven HC-130Hs to the U.S. Forest Service via the U.S. Air Force. Projects to further enhance the legacy HC-130H fleet have been canceled, redirecting the acquisition project’s focus to the procurement of HC-130J aircraft and mission systems.

Upon completion, the Coast Guard intends to operate a long-range surveillance fleet composed of 22 HC-130Js.

HC-144A and C-27J Medium-Range Surveillance Aircraft

The Coast Guard’s medium-range surveillance aircraft fleet is comprised of 18 recently acquired HC-144A Ocean Sentries and 14 C-27Js that will be transferred to the service. The MRS fleet replaces the HU-25 Guardian jet as the Coast Guard’s principal fixed-wing maritime patrol aircraft, performing critical maritime domain

The RB-S II designs are scheduled to follow on to the original RB-S platforms designed after the September 11 attacks. [Photo courtesy of U.S. Coast Guard]


awareness, search and rescue, law enforcement, disaster response and other missions more efficiently and effectively than the legacy fleet.

The HC-144A Ocean Sentry is powered by fuel-efficient turbo-prop engines and is capable of remaining on station for 10 hours, flying at lower speeds across a wider search area. The Ocean Sentry also is a reconfigurable platform, with a roll-on/roll-off mission system pallet that includes a suite of specialized electronic surveillance and com-munication equipment that allows aircrews to tie into Coast Guard and joint-force classified tactical networks. The aircraft’s rear ramp allows the cargo bay to be configured for several missions, including maritime patrol, medical evacuation and transport missions.

The Coast Guard’s Ocean Sentries are assigned to four Coast Guard air stations. The service is acquiring a full-scale simulator to enhance pilot training for the new aircraft and its mission systems at the Aviation Training Center in Mobile, Ala.

In anticipation of receiving the first C-27J from the U.S. Air Force later this year, the Coast Guard established a C-27J Asset Project Office (APO) at Elizabeth City, N.C. The C-27J APO is developing Coast Guard-specific operational and maintenance procedures, train-ing plans, technical manuals and crew duties and leading efforts to achieve airworthiness certification for each of the aircraft. The C-27J APO will also develop a logistics program, including acquisition of spare parts and plans for training devices, and lead test and evalua-tion planning as the project transitions from acquisition of the base aircraft to the missionization stage.

The Coast Guard plans to introduce 14 C-27Js into the fleet in the coming years, 13 of which are currently stored in a preserved status with the 309th Aerospace Maintenance and Regeneration Group at Davis-Monthan Air Force Base in Tucson, Ariz. The 14th aircraft will be transferred directly to the Coast Guard upon accep-tance from the contractor.

H-60 Medium-Range Recovery HelicopterThe Coast Guard’s medium-range recovery helicopter, the H-60

Jayhawk, has been a workhorse of Coast Guard aviation since the 1990s. The fleet of 42 H-60s recently completed a complex overhaul to address critical maintenance issues. This conversion and sustain-ment project, performed at the Aviation Logistics Center (ALC), enhanced mission performance and enabled the newly configured MH-60Ts to continue flying through 2027.

The upgrade replaced worn components and systems on the helicopters and added new mission equipment to enhance capability and reduce operating costs. The Coast Guard has equipped its MH-60s with airborne use of force capabilities (including ballistic armor, weapons mounts and other modifications). The service has also upgraded the MH-60T with new avionics, an electro-optic/infrared sensor system and other improvements to enable aircrews to locate, identify and track targets day or night in all weather.

With completion of this phase of the project, the Coast Guard has initiated planning for additional upgrades over the next two

Our nation’s heroes sail off into the sunset.

We make sure they return back to port.


years to flight planning and navigation capa-bilities necessary to comply with Federal Aviation Administration navigation perfor-mance/area navigation standards.

H-65 Short-Range Recovery Helicopter

The Coast Guard’s short-range recov-ery helicopter, the H-65 Dolphin, first entered service in 1984. These aircraft are deployed onboard multiple Coast Guard cutter classes, as well as serving at air sta-tions across the country. The Coast Guard is continuing efforts to upgrade major aircraft systems and components at the ALC and to extend the assets’ service lives beyond 2027.

In earlier phases of the conversion proj-ect, the Coast Guard completed an engine replacement—providing 40 percent more power than the legacy engine—and equipped the helicopters with new electro-optical and infrared sensor systems, as well as airborne use of force kits.

The Coast Guard has completed further improvements to 77 of the service’s 99 Dolphins, replacing obsolete cockpit avionics and installing embedded GPS and inertial navigation systems. Following these enhancements, the aircraft have been designated as MH-65Ds.

In the final phase of the upgrade, the Coast Guard will install Common Avionics Architecture System (CAAS) cockpit equipment similar to that being installed aboard the MH-60T. As the aircraft complete the CAAS upgrades, the Dolphins will be re-designated as MH-65Es.

C4ISR PROJECTS

Command, Control, Communication, Computers, Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance (C4ISR)

C4ISR equipment is an important component of the mission capability delivered with all of the Coast Guard’s recapitalized cut-ters, boats and aircraft. C4ISR equipment and networks help the Coast Guard collect, process, share and act on information that may be crucial to the success of a mission. The C4ISR acquisition project helps Coast Guard and interagency decision-makers build in their command centers a realistic common operational picture of the working environment. The information derived from C4ISR equipment helps Coast Guard units work more effectively with one another and partners in other services to save lives, enforce U.S. laws and provide maritime homeland security.

Rescue 21Rescue 21 is the Coast Guard’s advanced command, control

and communications system created to assist mariners in distress and save lives and property at sea. As the maritime version of 911, Rescue 21 helps first responders communicate and work together during maritime emergencies.

The Rescue 21 system extends communication range to a minimum of 20 nautical miles from shore and also provides direction-finding capability to direct rescue assets along accurate

lines of bearing to targets in distress. The system also helps iden-tify hoax calls that unnecessarily divert assets and people from real emergencies. Rescue 21 is the first part of the Coast Guard’s recapitalization of its maritime communications infrastructure at its sector command centers. The Interagency Operations Center project and Nationwide Automatic Identification System will build upon and incorporate Rescue 21’s capabilities to improve America’s maritime safety and security.

Rescue 21 now is operational along the entire Atlantic, Pacific and Gulf coasts of the continental United States, as well as along the shores of the Great Lakes, Hawaii, Puerto Rico, the U.S. Virgin Islands, Guam and the Northern Marianas Islands, covering nearly 42,000 miles of coastline.

The Coast Guard is currently installing systems in Alaska and the Western Rivers (Mississippi, Missouri and Ohio River Valleys) to expand coverage in these areas.

Nationwide Automatic Identification System (NAIS)

The Nationwide Automatic Identification System enables the Coast Guard to identify, track and communicate with marine ves-sels using the Automatic Identification System, which is the global standard for maritime communications using digital VHF technol-ogy to continually transmit and receive voiceless data, including vessel location, course and speed.

When combined with other government information and sen-sors, the Coast Guard obtains a holistic view of the arriving ship’s crew, cargo and routing. Equipped with a comprehensive view of traffic on the nation’s waterways, NAIS helps decision-makers respond to safety and security risks.

Since September 2007, the Coast Guard has had an interim NAIS capability in 58 ports to receive data out to 24 nautical miles from shore. The Coast Guard is currently installing a permanent system capable of transmitting messages out to 24 nautical miles and receive messages from up to 50 nautical miles from shore. These capabilities are currently in place at 49 ports and eight waterways. In the future, the service will extend the enhanced

The 42 Jayhawks recently completed a complex overhaul that addressed critical maintenance issues, added new mission equipment and upgraded the avionics. [Photo courtesy of U.S. Coast Guard]


transceiver capability to an additional nine ports and three critical waterways. The NAIS system currently receives 92 million AIS messages per day from approximately 12,700 unique vessels in 58 ports and 11 coastal areas.

Interagency Operations Centers (IOC)

The Coast Guard’s interagency opera-tions centers project has deployed its Watch-Keeper software at 37 locations, providing a common maritime security information management system for the Coast Guard in conjunction with a full spectrum of port partners on the federal, state and local levels. Establishment of IOCs in these high-priority ports was mandated by the Security and Accountability for Every Port Act of 2006.

The IOC initiative establishes a nexus for bringing together maritime security part-ners to improve the ability to plan, coordinate and monitor daily operations. It provides integrated vessel targeting to fuse safety, law enforcement and intelligence data with vessel arrival lists, interagency operational planning and operations moni-toring capabilities. Features include an integrated geospatial system with weather data and “state of the port” display for daily overviews and multi-agency briefings. U.S. Customs and Border Protection crew, passenger and cargo information, as well as a scheduler to aid in resource allocation, are integrated into the software.

As WatchKeeper transitions from development to sustainment, maturing the system’s functionality remains a priority. The software is designed to be a dynamic system that can be upgraded over time so it will not grow obsolete, eliminating the need for an expensive replacement.

ACQUISITION LOGISTICS

The Coast Guard is incorporating acquisition logistics plan-ning into each of its acquisition projects to best prepare receiving units for the delivery and support of new assets, including surface and aviation platforms and C4ISR systems. Working closely with the Coast Guard’s technical authorities—the Human Resources Directorate (CG-1); the Logistics and Engineering Directorate (CG-4); and the Command, Control, Communications and Com-puters (C4) and Information Technology Directorate (CG-6)—the acquisition logistics community also assists in the implementa-tion of logistics policy and supports the Coast Guard’s investments in major systems acquisition facilities.

Asset Project Office (APO) Located at the Coast Guard Yard, Baltimore, the APO’s mis-

sion is to plan, manage and execute the delivery and transition of newly acquired assets to operational service in the field. The APO integrates major new asset product lines into the Coast Guard’s logistics and service centers. The APO manages the develop-ment of integrated logistics support plans and products; defines resource requirements for staffing product lines and associated

billets; trains, develops and directs prospective product lines; and provides logistics subject-matter expertise to acquisition projects.

The APO is currently focused on providing logistics support plans for critical Coast Guard surface acquisition projects.

Major Acquisition Systems Infrastructure (MASI)As asset delivery schedules and operational requirements

require, the Coast Guard’s Major Acquisition Systems Infrastruc-ture funding ensures that the necessary facilities and infrastruc-ture are in place to support new platforms and mission systems when they arrive in the field. Before delivery, the MASI team works closely with Coast Guard acquisition and logistics professionals to identify infrastructure needs and prioritize investments in new facilities and facility upgrades to accommodate the boats, cutters, aircraft and mission systems procured by CG-9.

Recent and ongoing MASI projects include:

• Construction of HC-144A support facilities at Air Station Corpus Christi, Texas

• Modifications of piers, support facilities and shore power systems to support FRC homeports at Miami; Key West, Fla.; San Juan, Puerto Rico; Pascagoula, Miss.; Ketchikan, Alaska; and Honolulu, Hawaii

• Coordination of activities in preparation for the second NSC homeport at Charleston, S.C.

• Construction of NSC and FRC training facilities in Yorktown, Va., and Petaluma, Calif.

• Conducting engineering studies and analyses for future-year facilities projects to support planning and budgeting for new vessel homeports

• Modifications to support RB-Ms at Coast Guard boat stations nationwide. O

For more information, contact Editor-In-Chief Jeff McKaughan at [email protected] or

search our online archives for related stories at www.cgf-kmi.com.

The national security cutters, like the Stratton, represent a leap in capabilities in one cutter over the legacy vessels the class will begin to replace. The multimission NSCs are designed with the endurance and the tools onboard to handle the full spectrum of mission requirements. [Photo courtesy of U.S. Coast Guard]


Benjamin Franklin famously wrote, “In this world nothing can be said to be certain, except death and taxes.” Had he been in today’s Coast Guard—Franklin is said to have wished to be a sailor as a child growing up in Boston—he might have included the unavoidable fact that marine ves-sels rust.

This does not mean that rust from either direct exposure to water and sea air or the related issues of deck slippage and fouling buildup on vessel hulls cannot be mitigated. Marine paints and coatings are a central component of this fight for the Coast Guard.

Mark Schultz, project development manager for Sherwin-Williams Protective and Marine, told U.S. Coast Guard & Border Security that helping

the Coast Guard and other military branches battle against the ravages of the sea is a significant challenge. One of a myriad of marine paint manufacturers, both small and large, that serve the miliary and broader commercial market, the 150-year-old U.S.-based Sherwin-Williams is a principal supplier to both the Coast Guard and Navy.

“The Coast Guard and the Navy are very good customers, very demanding customers that have very rigid and rigorous require-ments,” said Schultz. “And rightfully so—they have valuable assets to protect.”

While there is cross-use of products, Coast Guard needs often differ from those of other American marine armed forces. John Mangano, business development manager for North American Marine Marketing at Rockville Centre, N.Y.-based International Paint—part of the world’s largest paint company, Amsterdam-based AzkoNobel—said that operational differences result in the need for different products to meet different strategic needs.

“There is some crossover with (coating) approval, but the Coast Guard does have its own approval process and special needs,” said Mangano. “The Navy doesn’t need icebreakers.”

International Paint supplies the Intershield 300V abrasion-resistant pure epoxy coating pigmented with aluminium and Intershield 803 aluminum-free abrasion-resistant pure epoxy coat-ing to the Coast Guard. The paints provide high resistance against breakage and corrosion to the underwater hulls of the Seattle-based Polar Star and Polar Sea 399-foot Polar-class icebreakers

as well as the Cheboygan, Mich.-based 240-foot Mackinaw seagoing buoy tender/icebreaker.

The Coast Guard is also a leader in military coat-ing technology use. Polysiloxane finish coats have been used by the Coast Guard for years to improve gloss and color retention of the familiar white, red and blue paints used to makes its vessels readily identifiable.

“Based on the success of the Coast Guard for years, recently the Navy has started using polysilox-ane,” said Mangano. “That was something the Navy learned from the Coast Guard.”

John Mangano

maRine paint supplieRs have the coast guaRd coveRed.

By chRistian BouRge, cgF coRRespondent


International Paint also provides what Mangano described as “high-end products” for the Coast Guard’s new Sentinel-class fast response cutter (FRC) patrol boats, including its Interfine 979 acrylic polysiloxane finish to protect paint finishes, as well as its Intershield 6GV high-solid-epoxy non-skid deck coats and its Inter-speed 640, a traditional copper-based, polish ablative anti-fouling coating to protect the hull from buildup.

ensuRing a suRe Footing

Decks and other surfaces, including internal ones, are also subject to the sea elements, not just corrosive effects. The humid-ity level in the air and sea spray can build up, marring the ability of sailors and craft alike to keep a steadfast footing. While the Coast Guard uses peel and stick materials on its boats, non-skid paints remain a mainstay for wide area use.

Cuba, Mo.-based Bipacco Coatings has been supplying water-based coatings to the marine industry since 2002, specializing in low volatile organic compound (VOC) products made with non-hazardous raw materials.

“I brought water-based coatings to the marine industry in 1993,” said Bipacco President Tony Brady, whose career in marine paints began with him working offshore for coatings manufacturer Carboline. “The big manufacturers followed afterwards.”

Bipacco offers its Eco-Tred non-skid coating, which is made of 50 percent recycled materials. The water-based acrylic/alkyd resin rubber coating doesn’t contain VOCs.

“There are no toxins in it and it lasts long-term,” said Brady. “You can have long-lasting coatings that are user-friendly and environmentally friendly and are at the same price as their oil-based counterparts. And they are safe to clean up.”

International Paint offers a range of non-skid deck coatings, including Intershield 6GV used on the Guard’s FRCs, which is approved for both Coast Guard and Navy use. Mangano said the coating is the first Mil-Spec Type 5-rated coating that provides high-performing aggressive non-skid and durability. In addition, the low-solar-absorbing, high-volume solids (90 percent) epoxy non-skid deck coating is advertised to offer reduced maintenance costs and increased safety.

Along with its “very popular” Intershield 21, a rapid repair mix kit for direct-to-metal flight deck application which allows for mis-sion use within 18 hours, and Intercryl 588, a water-based acrylic copolymer top coat which helps bring foot-traffic area non-skid back to life, Mangano said the company is awaiting Navy approval for its Intershield 5150LWT epoxy, which is about 25 percent lighter than the Intershield 6GV non-skid and 60 percent lighter than Mil-spec and intended to significantly reduce application weight. He said it is applicable to both aircraft landing and non-landing areas.

“If you can reduce the weight of the non-skid, you can maybe improve fuel economy and speed, especially on these new alumin-ium-type craft the Navy is building,” he said.

Foulings aBate

Anti-fouling marine coatings have long been a central part of ensuring the efficiency and performance of military marine vessels by reducing drag, but have also come up against a great deal of environmental resistance due to the toxic nature of legacy addi-tives used to ensure anti-fouling performance.

SeaShield PileProtection Systems

SeaShield PileProtection Systems

Call: 281-821-3355

To Learn More Visit Us At

www.densona.com

Series 90

Timber Pile Protection

Series 2000HD

Steel & Concrete Pile Protection

Series 400

Timber Pile Structural Repair

Hydraulic Hoses & FittingsCorrosion Protection

Petrolatum Tapes


Anti-fouling paints come in three basic categories: controlled depletion polymers (CDPs), which use bio-cides to ensure anti-fouling ability; self-polishing copo-lymers (SPCs), which neither the Coast Guard or Navy use; and foul-release coatings, which are incredibly slick paints that help ensure biologic and other material does not attach or remain attached to vessel hulls.

While a decades-old technology with a fairly low-tech application, CDPs are considered quite effective in preventing hull buildup. Tin-based CDPs were very effective in preventing fouling development on outer hulls and thereby improving ship performance and durability, but became recognized as not very environ-mentally friendly and highly toxic to animals, so an International Maritime Organization (IMO) ban went into effect in 2008. The use of copper oxide in CDPs is the current standard. These contain high levels of rosin and similarly work by allowing seawater to penetrate the paint film, resulting in biocide release via diffu-sion. But there are concerns that the IMO might follow the same route and ban them due to environmental concerns.

“The Navy, in their wisdom, said that if they can ban tin-con-taining coatings, maybe they will ban copper-containing coatings, which are the mainstay of today’s anti-fouling coatings industry,” explained Sherwin-William’s Schultz.

In response, Sherwin-Williams developed—in conjunction with U.S. Navy, Naval Sea Systems Command and Naval Research Lab (NRL)—their solvent-based Sea Voyage copper-free anti-fouling coating. He said it is becoming more widely accepted, including regular use by the Coast Guard with good success on its aluminum-hull crafts. Following demonstrations on larger-hulled craft last year, approval for use on such vessels is also a possibility.

“It contains several biocides that, while effective in preventing growth on underwater hulls, do not persist in the ecosystem and degrade into non-toxic components in about 24 hours,” said Shultz.

International Paint takes a different technical approach to the fight against hull fouling with its Intersleek line of anti-fouling coatings, which include the silicon-based Intersleek 787 and its fluoropolymer-based follow-up, Intersleek 900, both of which have Coast Guard and Navy approval.

To that end, in 2013, the company launched the Coast Guard and Navy-approved Intersleek 1100SR line as a next-generation fluoropolymer coating. The biocide-free fouling control coating specifically targets slime buildup as well as barnacles and weeds.

“If you can reduce the drag of the ship, you can then increase speed or reduce fuel consumption,” said Mangano. “If you reduce fuel consumption, you reduce your CO2. Our Intersleek products are the only ones that now qualify in the marine market for carbon credits.”

Scott Preece, marine manager, North America, for Denmark-based Hempel A/S, a 100-year-old company that has been in the U.S. market for around 40 years, said that while it is known primarily as a commercial marine paint company, its coatings are used by the Coast Guard. Known primarily for its anti-fouling and epoxy coat-ings, Hempel has devised a patented new hybrid anti-fouling tech-nology called Hempaguard that combines the characteristic biocide release properties of CDPs and silicon hydrogel. The company is beginning discussion with NRL about applications.

“We believe this product will allow a wide variance of operational profile with potentially long periods at idle (a problem seen with more traditional anti-fouling coatings),” said Preece. “We think it will be a real bonus for the Navy and Coast Guard.”

Bipacco Coatings also has a foul-release coating in field testing that is based on soybean urethane and uses what Brady, whose daugh-ter has been in the Coast Guard for a decade, described as a “special pigment hardener” in its fiber reinforcement that is “almost like an iron oxide” in its effect.

“We are a smaller manufacturer with a lot of technical exper-tise,” said Brady, noting that the company has a coating currently being specified for use on NASA’s Orion deep space crew exploration vehicle’s external needs providing protection for a range from the potentially incredibly hot temperatures of space down to below 200 C. “The big guys are buying the little guys, and from what I’ve learned, the little guys are able to think outside the box and take more risks.”

pRimed FoR pRotection

Arguably the most essential marine coating is anti-corrosive priming, both for external surfaces and internal areas, including ballast tanks. For instance, while it is standard practice to apply anti-fouling paint to keep metal-hulled vessels clean from marine organ-isms and smooth to reduce drag and conserve fuel, it is combined with an effective base anti-corrosive coating to ensure effectiveness.

In the marine coating market, anti-corrosion paints typically mean epoxy coatings, including both pure resins and different types of reinforced resins to improve the paint’s anti-corrosive, anti-abrasive and hardness qualities with materials, including carbon, glass and synthetic fibers.

International Paint’s Mangano said the company is currently in the process of gaining Navy and Coast Guard approval of a high-solids version (78 percent) of their Intershield 300V anti-corrosive coating used by the Coast Guard. It has a lower VOC content and provides high performance at both low- and high-film applications. Developed in response to increased EPA attention to epoxy-coating content, the Intershield 300HS is also an aluminum-pigmented

Even with perfected naval architecture, untreated hulls can build up layers that create more and more drag—reducing efficiency and burning additional fuel. [Photo courtesy of U.S. Coast Guard]


coating offering slightly longer cold-weather touch-drying times and similar hard-drying times.

But the anti-corrosive market is much broader than just military spec products, with a host of com-panies looking to expand the product types used by the Coast Guard. Hempel, which specializes in fiber-reinforced anti-corrosive epoxies that take advantage of the much tougher physical robustness they bring to a coating, is one such major player.

“Fibers can be more costly, but their anti-corrosive properties and the number of years they hold up ver-sus unreinforced epoxies is a tremendous boost to end use,” said Preece. “At Hempel, we think the next big benefit is going to come from fiber reinforcement. It prevents cracking, has greater hang ability—you can spray it on thicker—and has great impact resistance. It is an excellent technology.”

But the greater expenses of such coatings have limited their military use. Preece noted the company is currently reworking their offer with the Navy, which they’ve worked with in the past, a move that will lead to eventual changes with the Coast Guard.

“Typically most manufacturers, to be competitive, are looking to put their most cost-effective product in front of the Navy or Coast Guard because that will meet the client specifica-tion,” added Preece. “To my knowledge, no one has put reinforced products on the qualified product list. This is one of the areas that I think the military should be taking a look [at].”

South Carolina-based Grace Distributing has been the exclu-sive U.S. provider of Norwegian-supplied, Dutch-made LifeGuard base coat primer in the U.S. market since 2009. Offered in Norway since 1994, the paint has about a 50 percent market share in the Norwegian commercial shipping industry, according to Grace Dis-tributing President John Griffin.

A waterborne 2 percent VOC acrylic copolymer universal primer, LifeGuard’s application to a vessel is different than other primers in that it begins with less than the traditional full abrasive blasting, instead using ultra-high pressure water jets as the paint adheres very tightly to rust and existing paint.

“The obvious advantages are when you can pressure wash instead of abrasive blasting—when I say that, I mean 7,000 pounds per square inch (PSI) to 10,000 PSI versus 30,000 PSI to 40,000 PSI—we can come across a barge or a Coast Guard vessel along the side,” explained Griffin. “It’s basically like getting routine maintenance done in a very effective manner and at far less cost.”

Along with the lower labor cost resulting from the need for less intense blasting, Griffin noted that this is done at virtually any location and does not require transport of the vessel to a specific facility. In addition, the cost of cleaning up and disposing of abra-sive blast material is mitigated, as the customer only potentially has to pay for the easier job of capturing water in the area around the vessel.

Although LifeGuard cannot be applied underwater and would require dry docking for application below a vessel’s water line, Griffin said the cost to the customer is much less than the industry standard of $4 to $6 per square foot.

“We’re fast and spend less labor than traditional methods,” said Griffin, whose company recently began offering coating services along with the product. “We can do a top to bottom job, minus the

cost of a top coat, for $2 a square foot to come in and prep, prime and apply two coats of a top coat system. It saves a lot.”

Thought not yet on any U.S. miliary spec coatings lists, Griffin added that there are those in the Coast Guard who are familiar with their offering and that the company has begun to target the U.S. military marine market, with small amounts of the primer being tested on the USS Enterprise and USS George Washington.

“My understanding of the Coast Guard position is if the Navy approved it, we are gung-ho,” he said. “We just have to wait and see.”

Another important area of marine corrosion protection is ballast tanks. Schultz said that Sherwin-Williams has been working closely with the Navy to provide single-coat, rapid-cure coatings that avoid the need to prime tanks, then strip the edge before the final finish is applied. This three-coat process can take a number of days due to curing times. The company’s Fast Clad ER paint, an edge-retentive, ultra-high-solid low-VOC epoxy amine coating, provides immersive protection for ballast tanks after only 24 hours of painting a single coating. Developed with the Navy, the technology has been trans-ferred to Coast Guard use.

Looking forward, the company is developing a version of the paint that uses optically active pigments to provide easy visual inspections. Currently in prototype form and being developed in conjunction with the Navy and Naval Research Labs, the goal of the R&D project is to have a coating change color as a function of film thickness, moving from translucent to opaque with a color shift in real time as the applicator is spraying the coating.

Although they are still working out the specifics, the idea is providing the ability to use the naked eye or a visual tool both the applicator or QA/QC inspectors could use to ensure film quality.

“You could do a visual inspection rather than going around a tank or whatever spec with a dry film fitness gauge and having to take hundreds and/or thousands of readings with a mechanical tool,” said Schultz. “A visual inspection would be much faster.” O



A maritime environment is not exactly the best place for things made of metal. They require constant labor-intensive work and monitoring. [Photo courtesy of U.S. Coast Guard/by Petty Officer 3rd Class Cynthia Oldham]


Explosive Trace Detector

Marking a major milestone for the company, Implant Sciences, a high-technology supplier of systems and sensors for homeland security and defense markets, has recently completed the Transportation Security Administration’s (TSA) Explosive Trace Detection (ETD) qualification requirements for aviation checkpoint and checked baggage screening certification process for its QS-B220 desktop explosives trace detector.

The QS-B220 becomes the first ETD with a non-radioactive source to be added to the TSA’s qualified product list (QPL).

“The addition of the QS-B220 to TSA’s QPL is the single most significant achievement in our compa-ny’s history,” stated Implant Sciences’ President and CEO, Glenn D. Bolduc. “We’re very proud to be able to deliver this innovative product for the protection of travelers in our country. Every member of the Implant Sciences team has done a phenomenal job of getting us to this point. We would also like to recognize the support we have received from our shareholders and other investors over the last few years while we have been pursuing this most signifi-cant qualification. Without their support this would not have been achievable.”

The QS-B220 uses Ion Mobility Spectrometry to rapidly detect and identify trace amounts of a wide variety of military, commercial and homemade explosives. Featuring a radioactive material-free design, push-button maintenance and diagnostics, and a patented inCal internal automatic calibration system, the QS-B220 brings new levels of perfor-mance and convenience to desktop trace-detection users with unsurpassed ease of use.

Securing the Cities Program

The Department of Homeland Security recently announced the expan-sion of the Domestic Nuclear Detection Office’s (DNDO) Securing the Cities program to the National Capital Region, further building upon the department’s ongoing efforts to raise the nation’s capabilities to detect and protect against radiological and nuclear threats. The Securing the Cities program seeks to lessen the threat posed by dangerous radiological or nuclear materials against major metropolitan areas in the United States by establishing sustainable capa-bility among state, local and tribal agencies to detect and report dangerous radiological and nuclear materials within their jurisdictions.

“Expanding the Securing the Cities program to the National Capital Region, New York City and Los Angeles and Long Beach is another step in our efforts to raise the nation’s capabilities to protect against catastrophic threats,” said Secretary of Homeland Security Jeh Johnson. “This program is a key part of the department’s efforts to enhance the capability of all our partners to detect and interdict dangerous radiological and nuclear weapons or materials in major metropolitan areas.”

This is the third implementation of the Securing the Cities program.

The program began in 2006 as a pilot project for the New York City region and expanded to the Los Angeles/Long Beach region in 2012. The Department plans to expand to additional cities in the coming years.

As part of the Securing the Cities program, the District of Columbia’s Homeland Security and Emergency Management Agency will receive a direct grant of up to $30 million over five years, beginning with $6 million in 2014. The funding will allow the district to work with partners in the National Capital Region to build a robust, regional nuclear detection capability for law enforcement and first responder organizations. Initial efforts will focus on analyzing the region’s current capa-bilities and planning for post-program sustainment activities.

DNDO will also provide equip-ment and assist regional partners in conducting training and exercises to further their nuclear detection capa-bilities and coordinate with federal operations. At the conclusion of the program, DNDO will continue to support the region through activities such as alarm adjudication and by providing subject-matter expertise in the areas of training, exercises and technical support.

CBRN Sampling SetsIn response to the call for need as

outlined in the Dismounted Reconnaissance Sets, Kits and Outfits (DR-SKO) requirement developed by the JPM-Nuclear, Biological and Chemical Contamination Avoidance and approved by the JPEO-Chemical and Biological Defense, QuickSilver Analytics, Inc. (QS) has been selected to provide inte-gral CBRN sampling and supplies for inclu-sion into the overall system.

In a statement, the company said, “With over 20 years of experience in the CBRN

analytical and sampling arena, it is with great pride that QS accepts the opportunity to provide support to the program through their extensive knowledge and expertise with regards to expendables, supplies, sampling and support. This collaborative effort that has been in progress for years and has recently (March 2014) been approved for full-rate production. Initial delivery to the U.S. Navy was in September 2014.”

The need for a standardized set of recon-naissance equipment that addresses the full

CBRN spectrum to be deployed to warfighters in the field that was consistent and sustainable is an issue that has emerged within the past decade. The solution was realized through the system of the DR-SKO development.

The selection of system components, which was spearheaded by a team of scien-tists, engineers, logistics specialists and program analysts from within the JPM, was focused on a broad range of criteria indica-tive of the type of environment that would be expected by the military.


oN tHe HoriZoN

SnowmobilingThe U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP)

Office of Border Patrol Sault Sainte Marie Station has a requirement for snowmobiles to support operational patrol requirements across extremely rugged terrain. A contract was recently awarded to BRP US Inc. for six snowmobiles to “fill a critical need and increase the unit’s capabilities for conducting operations in areas that are difficult to access using conventional methods. The power needed must be able to transverse any terrain challenges and provide a persistent climb when engaging mountainous terrain.” The station’s current inventory is aging and this requirement will assist in revitalizing the unit’s current snowmobile assets in order to maintain a high degree of effective-ness and operational readiness.

According to the solicitation, the snowmobiles had to be equal to, in all material aspects, the 2014/2015 Polaris Switchback 600 Adventure snowmobile.

Coastal Interceptor VesselThe Department of Homeland Security, Customs and Border Protection (CBP) has

announced its intention to issue a solicitation with full and open competition for the procurement of the coastal interceptor vessel (CIV). The anticipated period of perfor-mance will be for a base year commencing around January 1, 2015 through December 30, 2015 and four 12-month option years for up to 52 vessels.

The CIV will serve as a maritime law enforcement vessel that will transport and employ U.S. CBP marine interdiction agents (MIA) for a variety of missions. In particular, the CIV will provide the CBP MIA with a versatile, multimission platform to perform their duties and missions while operating in littoral waters and in offshore areas of the United States and its territories in varying sea and weather conditions. Missions include patrol, interdiction, special operations and port security support.

The CIV will provide the space and configuration to transport and employ a number of mission-specific payloads, including CBP mission systems; support the tactical movement of MIAs for mission operations; and support the pursuit of suspect vessels for the purpose of boarding, searching, and, when necessary, arresting violators and seizing the vessel and/or contraband. The CIV shall be capable of law enforcement operations that include performing high-speed maneuvers and turns in close proximity to other vessels.

The CIV hull is comprised of a deep-V mono-hull designed for high-speed, open-ocean transits and should be based on a mature parent hull, following best engineering design practices engineered with a service life of at least five years.

Anti-Exposure SuitsThe Department of Homeland Security, Customs

and Border Protection and the Office of Air and Marine (OAM) are responsible for the interdiction of illegal contraband and persons, and serve as the first line of defense against terrorism. Based on the ever-changing law enforcement operational environ-ments encountered by DHS/CBP Marine Interdiction Agents, the issue of proper law enforcement safety equipment is vital to OAM.

OAM has recently recognized inventory laws with regards to a vital piece of law enforcement equipment and must purchase additional Mustang deluxe anti-exposure suits. This suit is used by marine personnel operating OAM vessels during adverse conditions. This suit is designed with the Comfort Cuff tech-nology, which creates a relaxed and comfortable fit, along with Tug-Tite technology Velcro wrist and ankle closures that improve fit and limit water flushing if immersed. Additionally, the suit has two chest pockets, two large front cargo pockets and an inflatable head pillow for additional in-water support and buoyancy, and utilizes closed-cell foam, which offers floatation and hypothermia protection in the event of water immersion. As well, this suit has SOLAS reflective tape, which enhances visibility; moreover, this suit blends functionality and features that meet and, in some cases, exceed the demands of a wide range of profes-sional (law enforcement) and industrial uses while protecting the wearer from extreme weather.

Principal particulars are as follows:

Length overall 40-43 feet

Beam maximum 9 feet 6 inches – 12 feet 3 inches

Draft maximum 36 inches

range 350 nautical miles

Speed 54 knots

Propulsion 4 x 300 HD Mercury Verado outboard

crew capacity Shock-mitigating seats for 4

Maximum vessel height on trailer 13 feet 6 inches

construction material Aluminum or fiberglass

Standards American Boat and Yacht Council, International organization for Standardization


Compiled by KMI Media Group staff

Providing Maximum Innovation, Technology and Taxpayer Value

Innovation Provider

Mark S. BorkowskiAssistant Commissioner and Chief Acquisition Executive

Office of Technology Innovation and Acquisition

U.S. Customs and Border Protection

Q&AQ&A

Mark S. Borkowski became the assistant commissioner for the Office of Technology Innovation and Acquisition (OTIA) with U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) in July 2010. He is responsible for ensuring technology efforts are properly focused on missions and well-integrated across CBP for strengthening effectiveness in acqui-sition and program management. In addition to being the assistant commissioner for OTIA, Borkowski serves as CBP’s component acquisition executive responsible for ensuring acquisitions support a mission requirement, are cost-effective and are integrated across all of CBP where appropriate.

Prior to his appointment as assistant commissioner, Borkowski served as executive director of the Secure Border Initiative (SBI) Program Executive Office (PEO). As executive director, he oversaw the Department of Homeland Security’s implementation of SBI at U.S. Customs and Border Protection, and oversaw SBI’s contin-ued efforts to develop border security resources that will provide enhanced situational awareness for frontline CBP personnel along the U.S. borders.

Before assignment to SBI, Borkowski served as the executive director for mission support at Headquarters, United States Border Patrol. In this role, he supported the chief of the Border Patrol in executing the Border Patrol’s $2 billion annual budget and in managing a total workforce in excess of 17,000 agents and support personnel. He oversaw functions of workforce management, labor and employee relations, finance, logistics, recruitment, training, facilities, and tactical infrastructure. As a DHS Level III certified program manager, he provided expert advice and support to the chief of the Border Patrol with respect to the technology program within SBI, SBInet. Borkowski directed a contracted effort for orga-nizational development to redesign and transform the Border Patrol to respond to an unprecedented growth in the organization driven by presidential mandate. His division staff included 75 personnel assigned to six separate geographic locations. Prior to his appoint-ment as executive director of mission support, Borkowski served as director for asset management in CBP’s Office of Air and Marine.

Before joining CBP, Borkowski was the program executive for the Robotic Lunar Exploration Program in the Exploration Sys-tems Mission Directorate (ESMD) at NASA headquarters. In that role, he oversaw the development and operation of robotic precursor

missions to the moon as stage-setters for eventual human missions. Previously, he served as the assistant deputy associate administra-tor for development programs in the ESMD. Borkowski assisted the deputy associate administrator in overseeing the technology, development and acquisition programs to implement the Presi-dent’s Vision for Space Exploration. He also served as the program executive overseeing the Hubble Space Telescope Robotic Servic-ing and De-orbit Mission and as the ESMD coordinator for NASA’s Exploration Transportation Strategic Roadmap.

Borkowski served over 23 years on active duty in the United States Air Force, retiring at the rank of colonel. His last assignment in the Air Force was as system program director for the Space-Based Infrared Systems (SBIRS) program office. In that capacity, he oversaw satellite programs worth over $40 billion, including the Defense Support Program (DSP), SBIRS-High, and SBIRS-Low. During his Air Force career, Borkowski also served as the support group commander at Eglin Air Force Base; the chief of the Pro-gramming Division at Headquarters, Air Force Materiel Command; the assistant chief of staff at the Ballistic Missile Defense organiza-tion; and in a variety of other staff, acquisition and engineering positions. Borkowski elected to decline an offer of promotion to brigadier general and to retire from the Air Force in 2004.

Borkowski has a master’s degree in astronautical engineering from the Air Force Institute of Technology and a master’s degree in national resource strategy from the Industrial College of the Armed


Forces. He also has bachelor’s degrees in aeronautical engineering from AFIT and in mathematics from the State University of New York at Albany.

Borkowski has certification from both the Department of Defense and DHS at the highest level (Level III) for acquisition management.

He has won numerous awards, including the Air Force Asso-ciation, Lieutenant General John W. O’Neill Outstanding System Program Director Award; the Company Grade Officer of the Year and the Manager of the Year Awards from the Air Force Rocket Pro-pulsion Laboratory; the Air Force Systems Command nominations for the “Ten Outstanding Young Americans” award; several military medals and decorations and civil service performance awards.

Q: Looking at your budget requests, it looks like you could see an increase over fiscal year 2014 dollars.

A: There are some increases in our budget compared to prior years—just a slight increase.

Our budget is broken into two basic parts. One is called develop-ment and deployment, and the other one is called operations and maintenance. In the past, we’ve been funded for the development and deployment of technology largely in the Arizona Technology Plan: the integrated fixed towers, the remote digital surveillance systems, the mobile surveillance capability and the mobile video surveillance system.

There’s also been money in there for technical communications upgrades. We’ve used funding to accelerate some deployment of technology to Texas. With the funding requirements for Arizona now covered, we were able to allocate funds elsewhere.

Overall, in development and deployment, although the total dollars have actually gone down, we were able to move money to accelerate Texas deployments, which have become a high priority.

Our operations and maintenance account, which covers the systems we’ve bought—keeping them fresh, working and repaired— has gone up. As you can imagine, as we’ve deployed more technology, there has been higher demand for additional operations and maintenance.

Regarding the current presidential budget request, the feedback we’ve received has been pretty positive. We’re optimistic about that part of our budget.

There’s also been continued discussion about the supplemen-tal appropriation with some congressional interest in technology, centering on whether or not there’s going to be additional oppor-tunities for funding and additional opportunities for acceleration of some technology deployment.

Q: Do you have any latitude in moving monies between those two segments of the budget?

A: Within each of those areas, we have very limited latitude. We have very small amounts of money that we’re allowed to move and generally

© 2014 Trijicon, Inc. Wixom, MI USA 1-800-338-0563 www.trijicon.com

PML7033-2 Rev(14.0)

THE ULTIMATE PATROL OPTIC

Trijicon_USCoastGuard_PML7033-2 Rev(14.0).indd 1 7/29/2014 10:01:09 AMwww.CGF-kmi.com CGF 6.5 | 17

only with congressional approval. When it’s in the operations and maintenance account, I typically cannot use it for development and deployment, and vice versa.

Q: Going down into the budget, looking at FY15, a couple of pro-grams seem to stand out: the remote video surveillance systems (RVSS) and mobile video surveillance systems (MVSS). Can you touch on each of these programs?

A: The RVSS and the MVSS are exactly what I talked about for accel-erating the technology deployments to south Texas—those are the priorities of the border patrol in Texas. We’ve been in the process of awarding contracts for remote video surveillance systems and the mobile video surveillance systems as part of the Arizona Technology Program. When developing those contracts, we wrote flexibility into them to give us a head start in Texas as well.

Because we have that flexibility and because of the emphasis on Texas, we have the ability to act more quickly than if those contract vehicles had not been written that way.

Q: And the status of those contracts?

A: The remote video surveillance system contract is on contract. That contract covers the buying and hanging of the cameras and the send-ing of the camera signal back to a command center.

In addition to that contract activity, we have to have towers or locations to put those cameras. While we have the contract vehicle to buy the cameras, the long lead is the activity to find the build sites, get environmental approval for the towers and construct them. We don’t have those contracts, but we are in the process of preparing the groundwork for them.

The contract for the mobile video surveillance system was recently awarded for an initial quantity of four, but has the capacity to buy almost 100 if there is additional funding.

While the contract was recently awarded, unfortunately there has been a protest. Interestingly, this protest is on different grounds from most others. The contract was a small business set-aside, which means only small businesses were eligible for this award. After we awarded it, some of the unsuccessful bidders protested on the grounds that they don’t believe that the winner is a legitimate small business. The Small Business Administration is currently sorting through that; we’re waiting to hear their answer.

Q: In general, is the contracting and acquisition process that you have to work within as streamlined as it could be, or do you see opportunities to improve?

A: I think there are. I think the contracting system is very slow and there’s a reason it’s slow. We have to start by understanding that.

It’s very frustrating, it’s very unwieldy, and it’s very bureaucratic. But, to be fair, let’s start off by explaining why.

These are taxpayer dollars. I once had a CEO in my office explain-ing to me that he had a great system and he didn’t understand why it took so long to just buy from him. I told him that if I could make the decision to just buy from him, I could make the decision to give a contract to my mother.

These are government dollars; these are taxpayer dollars. Every legitimate business has to have the opportunity where they can compete for those dollars—that, by itself, creates a certain kind of

bureaucracy and a certain kind of rigor that frankly is very, very slow. Can it be streamlined to some degree? It can be. But we have to under-stand that there’s always going to be a certain amount of delay because it’s taxpayers’ money and the taxpayers have to be assured that that money is being spent properly, there’s no nepotism involved, there’s no favoritism involved, and the competitions for that money are fair.

Having said that, there are some things we need to look at. We tend to do things in series. By that, I mean we sit and consider what we want and need, and then we figure out how we are going to get the necessary budget. So you have several months to almost two years to figure out what you need. Then you have to get that into the budget process; that’s another one or two years. Then you can release a request for proposals. That’s another one to two years to contract award. The serial nature of the system is a big part of the problem.

We’re trying to figure out how we can get ahead of that serial nature and do things in parallel—and sometimes the way you can do things in parallel is by putting flexibility into the contract vehicles you have. For instance, the Arizona contract vehicles give us a little flexibility for a head start in Rio Grande Valley.

We’re starting to see some success with changing the way we buy things in the first place. We’re not trying to do system develop-ment here—we’re trying to buy nondevelopmental items. It turns out that that’s a lot different from the way we’ve bought things before. We go out and we say, “Look, I’m interested in systems that have these general characteristics, but I’m not going to tell you that you absolutely have to see 10 miles or you absolutely have to be all-weather. I’m going to tell you I’m interested in all those things but I’m willing to trade how much of it you can do for me against the cost and the schedule you offer me.” I’ll make those trade-offs for the sake of getting something more quickly and with lower risk.

Another thing that bites us in the acquisition process is that once we award the contract, things don’t work out the way they were supposed to. We find that the rocks are harder than we thought they were digging through. Every problem costs time. We’re trying to reduce the likelihood of those problems by having more confi-dence when we actually make the decision to buy. That also stream-lines the process. But when you allow suppliers to present what they have rather than ask them to design something they don’t have, that has some potential for streamlining the process as well.

Q: Meaning more nondevelopmental items?

A: Not only nondevelopmental items, but a significant change in the way we define the specifications and requirements in the actual solicitations. We’ve put a lot of flexibility into those and said if you’re Acme Technology Company and your system has 90 percent of what we’re interested in, we’d like you to bid. Depending on how much you cost and how much you can accomplish compared to others, you might actually be the best bang for the buck.

When you do that, you end up with a tremendous number of bidders, which became one of our challenges. We had to evaluate all the bidders, which cost us some scheduled time. But having a tremendous number of bidders allows really good, difficult decisions to be made in terms of costs and benefits.

It’s like buying a car. I can go get the luxury car or the compact car. I’ll buy the luxury car if it doesn’t cost much more, but if not, I’d like the opportunity to buy the compact car if it does the job.

You also bring in different parts of the industry, people who in the past would not have been able to bid on something where you


had very rigid requirements and where you said, “If you can’t do all of this, don’t bother bidding.” You end up with different companies who come into play. When you get that kind of competition with that number of companies, you can tell the bidders, “You don’t need to over-promise, just tell me what you can do. I’m not asking you to promise anything beyond.” It also reduces the risk downstream when you actually go to build things.

We’ve had some success with this approach; doing more looks very promising to us.

In the past, we’ve had some issues with Congress and others because we were so late in getting our request for proposals out and then in completing the source selection and making the contract award. But frankly, those were decisions that I elected to make in the hopes that they would reduce the downstream risk at the cost of the current schedule. We’re starting to see evidence that it pays off. It’s still too early to declare victory, but it looks promising.

Q: And you’re not just talking about upfront acquisition cost when compared to the long-term sustainment cost.

A: Exactly. That’s the classic cost of development and acquisition compared to the cost of operations and support.

I’m talking about the schedule and cost of actually conducting the source selection. Go back to the SBInet experience. We awarded that contract and were supposed to have it deployed in a few years. I think the contract started in 2006, and by late 2010, we started to deploy the first small area of the border. The border was basically supposed to be complete by then under the original contract.

I’m talking about cutting the risk once you’ve awarded the contract.

Q: Let’s go back to the Arizona Technology Plan. What are the les-sons learned from that approach to doing business?

A: First of all, it appears to save a lot of money. Everything that we have awarded on that Arizona Technology Plan has increased competition, increased opportunity for other businesses to get into it and reduced the risk of ultimate systems deployment. We learned all of that.

The other thing that we did was, and still is, controversial. Imagine that I have a menu of technology options. I’ve got

complex, extensive systems like integrated fixed towers and then I’ve got more simple systems like tripod-mounted cameras, tripod-mounted radars or unattended ground sensors. I’m buying all these disconnected systems and then someone says, “Well, wait a minute, don’t you have to tie all those together in some kind of common operating picture?”

The approach we took was, “No, we’re not going to worry about that.” What we really need is a basic technology out there. When we have the technology deployed, let’s let the demand for tying those systems together come as a natural result of operating them. We’re starting to see the benefit of that.

If you go back to the early SBInet days, they had already designed the towers, the cameras, the radars and a rudimentary command and control system—and had deployed nothing. We hadn’t deployed anything at that point. The reason we hadn’t deployed anything was that we had big money set aside to continue to develop a common operating picture, which was a central connection of all these sys-tems. As a result, we hadn’t put up any of this technology.

I remember standing under a tower at a test facility with the then-chief of the Border Patrol and thinking, “We got all this designed and ready to go, but because we’re waiting on the common operating pic-ture to tie it all together, we haven’t deployed squat in all this time.” So I turned to the chief and I said, “Chief, would you rather I take the money and put up these towers or continue to operate and build the common operating picture?” And he looked at me and said, “Mark, to tell you the truth, we never wanted the common operating picture.”

That’s the reason we took that approach. There was a whole new technology and the Border Patrol was comfortable saying, “Okay, look, just give me all the technology. I will manually connect it. I’ll look at three different screens. I’ll figure it out.” The other advantage of that is if you build the integration as a result of that Border Patrol experience, the Border Patrol was sitting there watching these sys-tems and asking, “This is getting complex. Can you put system A with system B?” At that point, you have a tightly defined requirement to put those two systems together. If you do what we were doing at SBI-net and say, “I’m going to build the common operating picture to end all common operating pictures,” the development could never end.

In other words, there’s not really a firm demand for it, so what are the real needs instead of the perceived needs? So we wait for the Border Patrol to come in and tell us specifically what they want us to do, which turns out to be a relatively straightforward, simple process.

This whole technology of common operating picture and technol-ogy and sensor fusion has evolved over these years, so there are things the Department of Defense has built that we can probably use as-is without any further development.

Industry is aware, of course, that we are deploying all these devices and eventually are going to want to connect them. Well, what does that cause industry to do? That causes them to say, “I’ve already got something for you; let’s talk.”

By putting more of that into small, bite-size chunks, it allows us to get incremental deployments of technology. We didn’t have one big drop. We had incremental deployments.

Q: You mentioned surplus or redundant equipment from DoD and taking advantage of those opportunities. Tell me more about that.

A: There have been tremendous opportunities and we’ve been tak-ing advantage of them. It’s everything from night vision goggles to advanced radar systems. We’ve received thousands of items from the Department of Defense. We have a very good relationship with vari-ous program offices in the Department of Defense and tremendously strong support from senior DoD leadership, which has broken down bureaucratic barriers from time to time.

We have thousands of items, from small to complex, but some of the most visible things are the aerostats. These were the same systems deployed in Afghanistan and Iraq. A couple of years ago, I was talking with some of the folks at DoD and they said, “You know we’ve got this stuff coming back and I think it’ll be declared excess. Are you inter-ested in it?” We said, “Absolutely.”

Something important to remember is that while I may not have to pay to buy the system, I do have to pay to operate and maintain it. Remember I told you how my operations and maintenance budget is going up to support that technology?

In a way, it was sort of a gutsy move originally to say we took this DoD equipment because we did not have that support funding through the budget. I remember having discussions with the leader-ship here and they said, “But Mark, we don’t have this budget.” And I


said, “I know, but I think it’s worth the risk.” Because all I have to do is pay to ship it and store it until we understand it better. And I don’t want to lose that opportunity.

Worse comes to worse and we decide that we cannot afford to operate it at steady state, at least we have access to it in the event of an emergency. That’s better than not having it at all.

The aerostats looked very promising; you can think of them as really high towers. We have five deployed now down in south Texas. They are doing wonderful things for the Border Patrol and giving them inside situational awareness and response flexibility that they’ve never had before. Keep in mind, the way our plans and budgets were going, we really didn’t think we were going to have much technology into south Texas until 2017/2018.

The aerostats come in three basic sizes: small, medium and large. We have acquired and stored eight of the small aerostats.

To go forward, we need to to figure out how everything all fits into the steady state. As you can imagine, that’s an initial shot in the arm which isn’t necessarily optimized or built to the right cost estimate. Part of the effort is to evaluate all those systems so that we can figure out how they all play together when we get into a more balanced, long-term plan. But in the meantime, there is technology in areas where we weren’t going to have technology for years.

Q: There’s been a lot of talk about agent-mounted cameras. Are you looking into that technology?

A: CBP is broadly studying whether that makes sense to us. There have been no conclusions yet that it does, but we’re certainly aware of some of the technologies and are looking at the potential to pilot some of them.

Q: You have articulated the importance of understanding and com-municating with industry to better understand what they can offer in terms of meeting CBP requirements.

A: In our case, one of the reasons that my office was established was to create a fairly simple entry point for people who needed one. We understand that it’s sometimes difficult for outsiders to understand how to do business or how to at least get a foot in the door to talk to someone at DHS or CBP. That was one of the purposes of creating the Office of Technology, Innovation and Acquisition.

Even though we’re not necessarily the end decider or end execu-tor, we are an entry point for anybody, and we can take care of getting people to the right place. To this day, I still schedule for anyone who wants an opportunity to come in and talk and tell me what they have. If I’m in town, I typically have one of those meetings a day. There’s a queue and I’ve been doing this for years.

Sometimes they want to hear from us; they may not necessarily have anything but they want to hear us talk about our mission and our issues. Sometimes they want us to give them feedback. A lot of times, we’re just having brainstorming conversations.

When we bring that information in, my office then sponsors, on a quarterly basis, a session with representatives of our end-users, our operators, the Border Patrol, office field operations and the office of Air and Marine, and we share everything we saw. When our operators see something of particular note, we try to use some of our resources to run at least a little bit of a pilot so that the vendor and our opera-tors have the opportunity to see if this could be something that they could do.

We have tried larger forums where we put together panels of our operational folks to talk about what they’re thinking among industry leaders. We actually sponsored one of those, and have run a number of panels over the past two years.

Industry liked it quite a lot. They gave us some feedback and said, “It was great, but you crammed a lot of information in there and the panels were all diverse because their missions are so diverse.” They suggested doing something smaller and more focused on a quarterly basis. We were in the process of planning those and then sequestra-tion hit. We’re in the process of figuring out if we can redesign those sessions and get them started back up.

I’m trying to find other mechanisms for other opportunities for industry, in addition to flexibilities in the federal acquisition regula-tions or flexibilities in the law.

I tell people in government that innovation is a war of attrition. The other thing that we’ve done very successfully was an initial

industry day for the RFP, a full day of activity really trying to empha-size that this is nondevelopmental and what that meant. Then, before we issued the RFP, we invited anybody who was interested to come and talk to the team that was building the RFP. My team met with people from industry so that we could make sure they understood what we wanted, and it also allowed them to suggest to us better ways to write the RFP.

We spent a long time doing that. That was another reason the RFP was delayed. I thought it was time well spent.

Q: Is there anything else you’d like to add?

A: You focused pretty much on the operational/technical part of the mission, which is: We’ve got an assignment to buy specific things. But we also, as an office, are responsible for tightening up the rigor and the discipline for the acquisition process writ large. That means writing policy, establishing policy, encouraging innovation, cover-ing innovation and covering risk-taking.

We do a great deal of that. It’s a lot less visible compared to awarding a contract and putting up a tower. DHS and CBP, as they grow, have increasingly recognized that this is a difficult business that requires a certain set of skills that have to be cultivated.

There are some people who think if you’re a good leader, you can do anything. That’s not really true. If you’re a good leader, you can lead, but if you don’t know how to do acquisition, you can lead people into a disaster. We spend a lot of time on that part of the activity and we’re making progress.

Our title has innovation in it and it’s interesting to watch inno-vation, it’s interesting to see panels and speak on panels about inno-vation. I think there’s a kind of view in government that innovation means using mobile technology. But if you really study innovation, that’s not what it really means at all.

Innovation is about culture change and change management and the ability to see opportunities to do things in a different way. It’s not about the gadget; it’s about the application of the gadget in a way that enables different things to be done, new things to be done or old things to be done in a significantly better way.

That actually comes from working-level people. My experience has been that innovation doesn’t come from the leaders; it comes from the working-level people. But they don’t innovate if their cul-ture and their leaders don’t support it. That’s the ‘I’ in OTIA. We are also spending a lot of time trying to be thought leaders in innova-tion and we have a lot going on there as well. O


The Department of Homeland Secu-rity—and its U.S. Customs and Border Pro-tection (CBP) component in particular—is eagerly embracing an increasing use of biometrics, encompassing a class of tech-nologies that identifies and authenticates individuals based on an electronic scan of personal characteristics such as one’s face, fingerprint or the unique pattern of an eye’s iris.

The developers and manufacturers of biometric systems are just as eager to pro-vide the cutting-edge tools required to meet this emerging and growing need, executives at these companies said.

“We see a very bright future for the bio-metric industry in those [homeland secu-rity and border security] applications,” said Mohammed Murad, vice president of global sales, marketing and business development at Iris ID Systems, a biometrics provider based in Cranbury, N.J.

The accuracy of biometric systems has “improved greatly” over the past 20 years, according to Ben Hutchinson, senior director for federal programs at Mor-phoTrust, a Billerica, Mass.-based biometrics technology company.

“There is a lot of accuracy,” he said. “Fingerprints and face are prob-ably the two most prolific biomet-rics. Iris is the most accurate, but it’s not widely implemented. Finger-prints are the gold standard. They have been around for almost 100 years if you count the way they’ve

been used with paper and ink by the FBI and the law enforcement community.”

Of the various types of biometrics—fin-gerprint, iris scan and others—Hutchinson said that he sees a lot of potential for facial recognition.

“I think one of the modalities that you’re going to see a lot more frequently is facial recognition, because it’s already printed on credentials and folks can also take a look at that in addition to the machine looking at it,” he said.

an impoRtant tool FoR a new mission

The mission to monitor the entry and exit of individuals to and from the United States was transferred to CBP in May 2013 and “we really embraced that new mis-sion space,” said Colleen Manaher, executive director of planning, program analysis, and evaluation for the Office of Field Operations within CBP.

The fervor that CBP brings to its new role is leading to a “transformative effort” involving a wider use of biometrics at an array of different U.S. border crossings, Manaher said.

“What we’re finding now that we have this new entry/exit mission is that we needed a strategy that can not only deploy some of the cutting-edge technologies in biomet-rics but also look at the fusion between biographic and biometric [information],” she said. “I think that is critical as we move forward, that fusion of biographic and bio-metric.”

That includes, for instance, supplement-ing existing systems at the nation’s airports by “evaluating emerging biometric tech-nologies,” she added.

Such a system would build upon the use of fingerprints—but also could well go beyond them, Manaher said.

“The fingerprint sort of represents our law enforcement foundation—how we inter-act with the FBI and how we interact with the

law enforcement community,” she said. “But if you were to add the additional identity biometrics—which would be face-[recognition]-on-the-move [or] iris-[recognition]-on-the-move—you can imagine the transformative prop-erties of such a deployed system, even at an airport.”

CBP plans this year to deploy experiments in mobile biometric use in an airport setting, Manaher said. In the next 12 to 18 months, CBP will be

seaRching FoR the chaRacteRistics that allow identiFication.

By scott nance

cgF coRRespondent

Ben Hutchinson Colleen Manaher


doing some “amazing experiments” in facial recognition, she added.

“As we start to look at the flights that are departing from the United States, we’ll actually start to fuse both biographic and biometric information on a mobile biometric [device],” she said.

CBP also plans to experiment with bio-metric systems on the southern U.S. border with inbound pedestrian traffic at Otay Mesa, which is one of three points of entry between San Diego, Calif. and Tijuana, Mexico, Mana-her said.

In these tests, the agency plans to deploy face-recognition-on-the-move and iris-rec-ognition-on-the-move technologies, she said.

“We’re going to be experimenting with each and every one of those biometrics to see what works, especially in the land border environment,” she said. “Also, at some of our airports … we’re going to start to look at facial recognition. We’re so excited about facial recognition that it’s an additional tool for us.”

Manaher cited work at the National Insti-tute of Standards and Technology, a federal agency within the Department of Commerce, which found that facial recognition technol-ogy today actually is “a little bit better” than a human being in terms of recognizing and identifying human faces.

“Now [facial recognition systems] don’t measure the intent [of a given individual], which is always what we need an officer to do,” she said. “But can you imagine if we could get the facial recognition out and deployed to all of our ports?”

a ‘Really gReat’ dhs BiometRics laBoRatoRy

In the longer term, CBP will be working with the science and technology component of DHS, which operates a “really great facil-ity” in Landover, Md., Manaher said. “They’re testing all sorts of what we consider long-term biometrics solutions,” she said.

One of the technologies being worked on at that lab is what Manaher termed “finger-print-on-the-fly.”

“You just wave your hand, and it grabs your fingerprints,” she said. “It has such transformative value, I wish it was avail-able today to deploy at all of our ports. It would cut down our process time because, right now, the taking of fingerprints is quite intense in terms of the process time.

“They’re looking at iris-on-the-move, and how and where would be the best place to

deploy a biometric exit solution. Is it at the airport gate? The jetway?” she added.

Such a system would be “very transpar-ent to the traveler,” Manaher said.

“If we were to deploy that, say at a jetway, can you imagine the future?”

not only entRy, But exit, too

A key aspect to the CBP mission will be not only to track individuals entering the United States, but also eventually to track those leaving the country as well.

“Part of our mission is now exit, or depar-ture, control. It’s been on the books for quite some time to deploy an efficient and effec-tive exit-control solution using biometrics,” Manaher said.

Although Congress and a number of federal agencies have talked about the need for an exit-tracking system since the ter-rorist attacks of September 11, 2001, “it’s just never been implemented,” said Hutchin-son of MorphoTrust.

“When you leave the country today, you typically have the airline checking the passport and there’s no real control over who’s leaving the country,” he said.

A biometric-based exit system today would be valuable, for instance, to track U.S. citizens who may be traveling to Iraq and Syria to participate in the deadly ter-rorist groups which have sprung up there, Hutchinson said.

In the past, the primary roadblock to the deployment of a comprehensive, national biometrics-based exit system was its cost, he said.

“Today, the prices have dropped dramat-ically and that’s really no longer a concern,” he said.

As part of its exploration of biometrics, CBP will, by 2016, deploy “a full-blown, operational” biometric system to track out-bound travelers “at a major airport” as a first step, Manaher said.

Manaher described the example of a visi-tor from Ireland departing the United States who has had his or her fingerprint and iris images already captured for biometric iden-tification.

That visitor would “go transparently through the iris-on-the-move, [so] the next time [they] fly I have that fusion of bio-graphic and biometric, [and] you’re almost

a known traveler to me at that point,” she said. “It’s a game-changer, if you see what I’m saying. We’re very excited about what we’re doing.”

the Biggest challenge: technology oR policy?

Biometrics technologies will continue to become smaller, faster, cheaper and more reliable, Hutchinson said.

“The real power is going to be the con-vergence of all of the screening, enrollment and maritime interdiction with the large-scale, back-end multimodal systems,” he said. “That’s where you get the real power, when you have a lot of data-sharing; when you have the ability to reach back into these databases and make those connections.”

Robert Wallace, president and CEO at BithGroup Tech-nologies, a Baltimore, Md.-based biometrics provider, said he sees other emerging technologies.

They include “gesture recognition,” an electronic means of monitoring peo-ple’s gestures as they move through a given area to watch for gestures “that are out of the norm,” he said.

They also include signature verification and voice biometrics, the ability of a system to verify a person’s identity through speech, Wallace said.

“Those are some of the [technologies] that I think that are emerging that could very easily be implemented at a border-control-type area,” he said.

However, all of these systems would require huge databases to compare a given biometric to in order to make an identity match, Wallace said.

“That’s going to be the biggest challenge, I think. It’s not so much the technology, in my opinion, that is the impediment—it’s the societal acceptance of allowing ourselves to be documented in this way,” he said. “How quickly we adopt these policies and tech-nologies will be a function of our national response or national concern about terror and our fear of terror. That could really accel-erate the acceptance factor.” O

Robert Wallace

For more information, contact Editor-In-Chief Jeff McKaughan at [email protected] or search our online archives for related stories at

www.cgf-kmi.com.


technology has incReased the Fidelity, Range and capaBilities oF electRo-optic sensoRs.By peteR BuxBaum, cgF coRRespondent

Surveillance systems used to secure borders, coastlines and waterways have become remarkably more capable in recent years. Sensors that weighed in the thousands of pounds have been reduced to little more than a dozen pounds, allowing for greater flexibility in their deployment.

Electro-optical and infrared (EO/IR) camera combinations, which facilitate day and night viewing of areas of interest, now provide 360-degree panoramas of the areas they are helping to protect. Advanced algorithms and data processing assist systems operators by identifying potentially problematic persons, objects and situations.

EO/IR systems that are geospatially enabled are sometimes referred to as radar, not because they emit a signal like traditional radar, but because they can pinpoint objects of interest and direct the attention of operators to a specific point on a map. Traditional radar systems are often also included in border and coastline protection solutions.

“We have made great strides with size, weight and power (SWaP) management and with the miniaturization of sensors,” said Frank Purdy, vice president of corporate engagement at Logos Technologies. “A system that once weighed 1,500 pounds has been reduced to 15 pounds.”

“We have taken a single thermal sensor and we spin it in such a way that it can gather images from a 360-degree field of view,” said Michael Dortch, chief technology officer at Thermal Imaging Radar (TIR). “It is continuously refreshed at the rate of 30 to 60 revolutions per minute depending on the camera, which creates a near real-time 360-degree panoramic view of the area under observation.”

“Our EO/IR radar systems utilize different algo-rithms for detections of people, aircraft and other objects depending on the environment where it is being deployed, whether it is air to air, ground to ground or ground to sea,” said Dave Port, director of marketing at Controp USA Inc. “The systems allow operators to choose a field of regard, whether that is 360 degrees or some more limited area. Once the stabilized head scans the selected field, the systems use pixel change detection software

to alert the operator that something has happened in a particular frame.”

Border and maritime security systems all include several basic elements, noted Gordon Kesting, vice president for homeland secu-rity solutions at Elbit Systems of America. “Sensors do the detection of people, objects and events,” he said. “These then must be identi-fied, whether it is a human or an animal, some kind of conveyance or something else such as an ultralight aircraft. Then they must be classified to determine the level of threat, whether what has been detected is friendly or hostile, [in order] to determine the existence and the nature of illegal activity or a threat situation. Then you want to track any detected activities to understand the progress of any movement.”

The systems must also include a communications element so that data can be transmitted back to a command center. “That is where operators work the system and can view the information being trans-

mitted in a common operating picture,” said Kesting. “They typically view information on digital maps and can use that information to determine whether a response is called for and resolve any incidents that they pick up from the system.”

“Operators are often covering a 100-square-kilometer footprint on the ground,” said Purdy. “It is not possible for anyone to process all the data that could be derived from that expanse of territory. It makes sense that you need some algorithms to stabilize images and to identify human and vehicle movements. Our customers are able to observe areas and targets of interest in real time as well as go back in time to analyze incidents forensically.”

Thermal systems work particularly well in maritime environments, noted Dortch, because water is a fairly uniform surface from a temperature standpoint. Thermal systems work by contrasting objects based on their heat profile against a background.

“Both radars and cameras have some capabilities of identifying and classifying objects,” said Kesting. “Radar is able to detect sufficient features to help identify an object. Classification is generally left to the cameras. They provide a higher level of detail required to classify a target and assign a threat level to it.”

Frank Purdy

Gordon Kesting


Radars now often stare at narrow areas of interest instead of scan-ning over wide areas, noted Kesting. “This provides much higher levels of reliability and lower false alarm rates,” he explained. “There are fewer detections but these have a much higher probability of being activities that operators want to focus on. Commercial maritime radars have been adapted in maritime applications for over-the-water detection. When those are coupled with complex algorithms, they provide a good detection and tracking capability in high-clutter envi-ronments. When wide area surveillance is called for, you need radar to provide that wide area of coverage and then train a camera on items of interest based on what the radars are detecting.”

Elbit Systems won a solicitation earlier this year from the Depart-ment of Homeland Security for its Integrated Fixed Towers program. A protest by a non-successful bidder stopped work on that project for several months. That protest was recently dismissed and Elbit was given the go-ahead to continue work on the system, which will provide surveillance at the Arizona border with Mexico.

The term radar, as it is applied to EO/IR systems, is something of a misnomer. “We call it radar because the system is geospatially oriented,” said Dortch. “We go through a complex calculation that calculates the depth value for all imagery so that we can pinpoint the source of an alert in three-dimensional space. We can put a red dot on a map to indicate the location of a person, object or incident. But unlike conventional radar, there are no active emissions. Operators can view alert locations on a map which is represented in a box on the 360-degree screen.” TIR has been awarded a patent for its system and has nine other patents pending.

“EO radar is similar to conventional radar in that the sensor will scan 360 degrees and automatically detect pixel changes as it comes around again,” said Port. “Conventional radars put a signal out 20 miles and try to pick up everything of a certain size. We allow operators to choose their own geographical segments and ranges according to the area [they are] operating in.”

The detection alarm that goes off in Controp’s systems is a visual alert with a box drawn around a questionable frame while an audible alarm draws the operator’s attention to that area. “Rather than provid-ing a ping on a radar screen, we give the operator a visualization, a picture image of what is going on at distances upwards of 12 kilome-ters on the ground and five kilometers in the water,” said Port. “We use specific algorithms based on whether the systems [are] scanning ground, air or sea.”

U.S. Customs and Border Protection has deployed the Controp systems for border protection, as have U.S. special forces in Afghani-stan for protecting forward-operating bases. Internationally, they have been installed in many countries, including Italy, Singapore and Israel.

Logos Technologies offers a system called Kestrel for border pro-tection and another system called Skua for waterways and ships. “The hardware included in both of these systems is commercial off-the-shelf technology,” said Purdy. “What makes our products work is the inte-gration of those sensors, which is an engineering feat, and what makes them think is the processing of the data so that operators can harvest actionable information for their piece of the mission.”

The processing aspect of the system Purdy terms “our secret sauce” and is patented. “Image stabilization is a fundamental piece of the processing,” said Purdy. “This allows real-time processing of the data at the sensor or elsewhere, whatever is in the best interests of the mission.”

The Kestrel system collects everything within its field of view with EO/IR sensors. “Kestrel is recording and analyzing every pixel and

takes measurements that define what a potential threat would look like,” said Purdy. “Skua, because it is focused on the water, operates with a different set of phenomenologies and doesn’t image everything. Instead, it detects changes through an algorithmic process and brings these to the attention of operators. If a pirate ship were coming out of nowhere, Skua would detect it at enough of a range to give opera-tors the ability to maneuver away from it or take action against that particular threat.”

Kestrel has been fielded in Iraq and Afghanistan since 2010. Skua is a pedestal-mounted system operated from shore and has been dem-onstrated to the U.S. Navy.

“Right now thermal radar needs to be stationary in order to be geo-spatial,” said Dortch. “There has been some interest in the Department of Defense for a geospatial capability on the move. We are working on developing such a capability so that its system could be installed on vessels. The system is lightweight and portable so that it can be stored on a vessel for when it is needed.”

Thermal radar is generally installed on top of a pole at a pier, har-bor or border area. “Border security is where we shine,” said Dortch. The company is in the process of setting up a large demonstration of the system for the Department of Homeland Security. TIR has won several awards for its surveillance system, including an award for secu-rity invention of the year from “Popular Science” magazine.

Future border and coastline security systems will likely include ever-smaller sensors, greater levels of automation and more sophis-ticated data processing capabilities. “We are spending quite a bit on the further miniaturization of our sensor systems in order to improve SWaP options for our customers,” said Purdy. “We are also making some internal investments on how surveillance systems can operate autonomously onboard power parafoils.”

“Our research and development includes continuing advances to radar systems and cameras,” said Kesting. “We also continuously look at ways to automate systems and make them as operator-friendly and useful as possible.”

Controp is working on adapting its systems to aerostats and unmanned aerial systems. “Aerostats hovering at 1,000 feet can pro-vide a wider area of regard,” said Port. “We are developing a highly stabilized 4-inch EO/IR camera with a laser pointer which could be suitable to aerostats and UAVs.” Controp is working with manufactur-ers of both of these kinds of vehicles to integrate their sensor payloads.

“We are also developing an even smaller micro EO/IR sensor with a continuous optical zoom that could be suitable for mounting on a UAV for perimeter and port security,” said Port.

Logos Technologies is in the process of developing a new version of Kestrel which would go beyond EO/IR detection to become a multi-modal sensor payload. “The sensor will be able to process all of that data in real time,” said Purdy, “and present it to operators in the form that they wish.”

Logos is also allocating its R&D dollars towards developing more sophisticated data analytics capabilities. “Sensor data could be com-bined with data from other sources relevant to a particular problem or mission,” said Purdy. “In addition to sensor system data, we will find other relevant data and present all relevant data sets to analysts. We are spending our internal research dollars on understanding large data sets and how they relate to our customers’ areas of interest.” O




For first responders decontaminating a scene, exposure to chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear (CBRN) elements presents significant danger since first responders are at risk of being contami-nated, and contaminated individuals enter-ing a hospital can shut down the facility.

Removing hazardous material generally takes the dedication of skilled personnel, time and the proper equipment.

First responders are looking for mass decontamination products that they can quickly set up and use and expand if necessary, according to Ron Nolting, vice

president of Hydro-Therm Inc. of Cum-ming, Ga. A high-pressure power washer with three nozzles that operates on a 2.5 inch discharge, their system can operate a five-person shower to remove contami-nants in a controlled environment.

The Hydro-Therm Trident One, a mass decontamination shower system, can deliver a low-pressure, high-volume water shower producing a wall of water using patented tele-scoping arms and three 150-gallon-per-min-ute nozzles. For a water source, the system is connected directly to a fire hydrant through a standard adapter, according to Nolting.

Risk to skin

Cell death may take place in individuals with high doses of CBRN exposure, while lower radiation doses and exposure to chemicals may result in changes in cellular function.

Quicker response times for mass decon systems are key, according to Amit Kam-poor, president of First Line Technology LLC of Chantilly, Va., who launched the company in 2003. “They want to set up in a more expedient way,” he said. A small-business supplier, First Line’s products are

speed and ease oF setup emeRge as key cBRn decon needs.

william muRRay, cgF coRRespondent


sold through GSA Schedule contracts and other contractual vehicles.

Concerned about the waste resources generated by a wet CBRN decon solution, Kampoor’s company sells a dry decon wipe to first responders, abandoning the com-pany’s previous practice of selling tents and shelters for mass decontamination. First Line markets its wipe as a one-time-use product that users can then throw away. In addition to selling Reactive Skin Decontamination Lotion (RSDL), First Line produces FiberTect, a dry decon prod-uct featuring a three-layer, flexible, drap-able, non-woven composite substrate for absorbing chemical warfare agents, toxic industrial chemicals and pesticides.

Not all vendors agree on the merits of dry decon solutions. “It takes a lot of water to clean up powder,” said Adam Havey, executive vice president of the BioDe-fense Division at Emergent BioSolutions of Rockville, Md. “We haven’t done any experiments with dry solutions,” he said.

Havey noted that some powder-based dry decon solutions could be blown away in a windy operational scenario when min-utes and response times count and confu-sion and missteps may cost lives.

“Trends we’re seeing are that the cus-tomers are looking for (decon) products that can reduce time and energy,” Havey said. His publicly-traded company’s individ-ual use decontamination packet, RSDL, is a sponge-based product with an active ingre-dient. Sold in individual packets, RSDL can handle all conventional chemical warfare decon threats to people, according to Havey, including tabun, sarin, soman, cyclohexyl sarin, nerve agent, mustard and T-2 toxin. He contrasts RSDL with older, water-based mass decontamination products, which he claims are less effective.

Emergent BioSolutions officials are seeing an increased demand for the prod-uct, particularly among first responders and foreign military, according to Havey.

The Joint Service Personnel/Skin Decontamination System (JSPDS) is a sys-tem developed in conjunction with the Department of Defense for decontaminat-ing the skin of warfighters exposed to chemical warfare agents. JSPDS consists of RSDL and Training RSDL, according to Meko Neri, an Emergent BioSolutions spokesperson. “Training RSDL is a lower-cost, inert version of RSDL used as an RSDL simulant in training scenarios,” she said.

DoD officials approved Emergent Bio-Solutions-supplied RSDL and Training RSDL as the material solution for JSPDS in 2007. Since then, Emergent BioSolutions has provided RSDL to every uniformed military service, including the National Guard and Coast Guard. Several other federal agencies, such as the State Depart-ment and FBI, also provide their employ-ees with RSDL. “Further, within the Coast Guard, RSDL is a component to an egress kit which allows Coast Guardsmen to safely exit contaminated vessels,” Neri said.

On the dry decon solution side, First Line Technology also sells a reactive skin decontamination lotion that users exposed to chemical warfare may apply, according to Kampoor. It is very difficult for many border patrol agents, first responders and military personnel to go to a central location after a CBRN incident, so a mass decon product like a shower set up in a central location doesn’t work well for their needs, according to Kampoor. Border patrol agents in the Southwest, for example, sometimes patrol hours away from their central duty office, given the length of the U.S.-Mexico border.

“They want you to keep it simple, easy to use and deploy,” Kampoor said of first responders, border patrol agents and mili-tary personnel.

DRS Technologies Inc., a subsidiary of Finmeccanica SpA, headquartered in Arlington, Va., provides a 526-lb. version of its Joint Service Transportable Decontami-nation System-Small Scale (JSTDS-SS), a self-contained unit that can work with water as hot as 175 degrees Fahrenheit, while a more lightweight, more expedi-tionary 320-lb version can heat water up to 140 degrees Fahrenheit. According to Jim Fritts, senior program manager at the company’s Environmental Systems busi-ness in Florence, Ky., the JSTDS-SS fits on a flatbed truck and is operational by a two-person team in less than 90 minutes.

The JSTDS-SS is designed for a thor-ough decontamination of non-sensitive military material, limited-use logistics bases, airfields, naval ships, ports, key com-mand and control centers, and other fixed facilities with exposure to CBRN agents, contamination and toxic industrial materi-als, according to officials at DRS.

In requests for proposals, federal buy-ers are looking for less expensive mass CBRN decon products, according to Kam-poor. “They’re looking for smaller form fac-tors that are more effective” in large-scale

procurements, he said. “They want it in a smaller package that can cover a larger area.” They also want both bio and chem treated in one package. He noted that there’s been consolidation among First Line Tech-nology’s decon competition in recent years.

“Eighty to 90 percent of contaminant can be removed from a person by disrob-ing after the accident,” Hydro-Therm’s Nolting said. “It contains the incident,” which is very critical if a person feels a burning sensation in his skin during a CBRN incident, he said. Fire departments, emergency management and hospitals, including military ones, are primary users of Hydro-Therm’s Trident One.

The system sends out a wall of water 30 feet out towards the contaminated indi-viduals. The heavy spray is likely to remove the remaining contaminant from them, according to Nolting, whose company has helped many hospitals become decon-com-pliant. Such a deluge of water, known as gross decon, is a good tool to use while formal decon response is prepared, accord-ing to Nolting.

After all, Nolting pointed out that if 2,000 people have been decontaminated by CBRN, some or all of them are likely to die if they have to go through a lengthy line in a formal decon response. “If there are 2,000 people effected by decon, you can’t run them through a line,” Nolting said. “They would die.”

Hydro-Therm charges about $3,600 per unit for Trident One, and the product is on the authorized equipment list for sourc-ing products for the military. According to Nolting, Veterans Affairs hospitals and all branches of the military, in addition to county emergency management agencies across the country, have purchased Trident One for rapid delivery of water in a short period of time during a CBRN incident.

Vigilance is the key for border patrol agents, first responders, hospital staff members and military personnel, who may one day encounter a CBRN incident. “There’s no crystal ball telling what could happen,” Nolting said, reflecting on the unpredictable nature of CBRN incidents, which first responders, military and border patrol agents are trained to respond to. O

For more information, contact Editor-In-Chief Jeff McKaughan at [email protected] or search our online archives for related stories at

www.cgf-kmi.com.


Calendar

November 19-20, 2014Launch & RecoveryLinthicum, Md.www.navalengineers.org

December 3-5, 2014International Workboat ShowNew Orleans, La.www.workboatshow.com

March 4-5, 2015ASNE DayArlington, Va.www.navalengineers.org

April 21-22, 2015Border Security ExpoPhoenix, Ariz.www.bordersecurityexpo.com

June 8-11, 2015National Homeland Security ConferenceSan Antonio, Texaswww.nationaluasi.com

June 23, 2015Mega RustNewport News, Va.www.navalengineers.org

advertisers index

Agustawestland Spa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C4www.agustawestland.com

Denso North America Inc . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11www.densona.com

Fairbanks Morse Engine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7www.fairbanksmorse.com

Stearns . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5www.stearnsafety.com

Trijicon, Inc . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17www.trijicon.com

This

inde

x is

pro

vide

d as

a s

ervi

ce to

our

read

ers.

KM

I can

not b

e he

ld re

spon

sibl

e fo

r dis

crep

anci

es d

ue to

last

-min

ute

chan

ges

or a

ltera

tions

.

USCgF reSoUrCe CeNter

NEVER STOP LEARNING

• AccessallthesurveyanswersfromthehundredsofschoolsthatparticipatedinMAE’s 2014 Guide to Colleges & Universities

• Newandimproveddesignmakesiteasierthanevertofindwhatyou’relookingfor

• Searchthedatabasebyschoolname,state,onlineorbrick-and-mortarschools

• CompareandcontrastinstitutionswithalltheinfoMAEusedtoscoreanddesignateourtopschools

Consideringanewdegree?Searchingforanewcareerfield?Advisingyourtroopsontheireducationoptions?YouneedMilitary Advanced Education’s2014 Guide to Colleges & Universities!

Checkoutthesearchabledatabaseatwww.mae-kmi.comforthedetailsprospectivestudentsandadvisorsarelookingfor!


Lucian Williams is the president of Denso USA LP, which includes the opera-tions in the United States and South America. He has a Bachelor of Science in construction science from Texas A&M Uni-versity. He started his career as a techni-cal sales representative in August 1990 for Denso’s SeaShield products and worked in a variety of roles over the last 24 years.

Q: What is Denso’s lineage and back-ground in prevention and sealing prod-ucts?

A: Denso USA LP is a wholly-owned sub-sidiary of Winn & Coales International, which was originally established in Lon-don, England, in 1883. We have been in business for over 131 years with the same trusted ownership. Denso’s petrolatum tape was developed over 85 years ago for the protection of steel pipelines against corrosion.

Denso’s anti-corrosion and sealing products have a proven track record of solving problems in all kinds of severely corrosive environments, including above or below ground applications and under water. We have offices and manufacturing plants around the world.

Q: With products that are obviously suited for a maritime environment, what has been your relationship with the U.S. Navy and Coast Guard?

A: We have a long history with the U.S. Coast Guard and Navy.

Over the years, we have supplied our Denso petrolatum tape system on ships and structures to protect pipes and fittings against corrosion. One of the main reasons the coating has been so successful is its ease of application with minimal surface preparation in wet and humid environ-ments.

Also, we have completed many proj-ects with our SeaShield Pile Protection Systems for their dock and pier facilities. We recently completed an inspection of a

Coast Guard facility in Ketchikan, Alaska, where our Series 100 Pile Protection was installed on steel piles for splash zone corrosion in 1996. The system was found to provide excellent corrosion protection [even] after 18 years.

We have case histories going back over 30 years ago with the U.S. Navy on provid-ing Denso petrolatum tape to protect the under-deck piping on many of their docks. In 1977, the U.S. Navy conducted a three-year test at Port Hueneme comparing vari-ous coatings versus the Denso petrolatum system. Our system proved to be the best coating system for under-deck piping and has become a standard for this application.

Q: With an eye towards the future, are there new corrosion prevention technolo-gies that you are working on?

A: We have a full team of chemists and a research and development department that continually look at new technologies for our tape products, liquid coatings, tank linings and pile protection systems.

We are currently working on the next generation of our SeaShield Series 2000FD to provide the ultimate splash zone corro-sion protection in the most severe envi-ronments.

We are also working on new hydrocar-bon resistance glass flake tank linings for fast return to service.

Q: Can you give me some examples of the kinds of new products you are experi-menting with?

A: We recently completed independent testing at Texas A&M’s Civil Engineering Department with our SeaShield Series 400 utilizing C-Grid 450 Carbon Fiber, Fiber-Form Jacket and underwater grout.

We tested the system for flexural bend-ing and compressive strength for the repair of timber piles. The system proved to double the strength of the original pile while reducing the weight when compared to the standard steel reinforcement (rebar) repair. All components are non-corrosive, so there are no future problems with spall-ing of the grout due to the rebar corrod-ing. The fiberglass jackets and grouts are manufactured in-house to provide superior quality.

We found that engineers appreciate all of our independent testing, as it provides them confidence when specifying our sys-tems.

Q: Other than corrosion mitigation, are there other advantages to using your products?

A: Denso has an excellent reputation for providing quality products.

Since we have had the same ownership for 131 years and only three chairmen, there has always been a commitment to providing excellent customer service. Many of our employees are trained and certified NACE Level 1 Coating Inspectors or higher. They are qualified to make recommenda-tions for our customers’ applications and very knowledgeable on all of our products.

We also can provide technical assis-tance and training at startup to make sure the project goes smoothly. We have built a trusted and reliable name with the U.S. Coast Guard and Navy due to our quality products and look forward to continu-ally providing them with proven corrosion prevention products and systems for their future projects. O

Lucian WilliamsPresident

Denso USA LP

iNdUStry iNterVieW U.S. Coast guard & Border Security


Features

Oil Spill/HAZMAT Mitigation & ResponseThere are a variety of technologies and techniques available to manage the response to a contaminated spill on land or in the water.

Onboard Fire Detection & SuppressionQuick detection and automated response can be very effective when faced with fire onboard a cutter.

Maritime SurveillanceDay/night optics with the ability to operate in all weather conditions are key parameters for the maritime mission of the Coast Guard.

Cover and In-Depth Interview with:

CommandantU.S. Coast Guard

Admiral Paul F. Zukunft

Cutter ProgramsThe Coast Guard’s legacy, newly commissioned and in-development cutters all have something in common—the mission. U.S. Coast Guard Forum looks at the various cutter programs.

Insertion Order Deadline: February 23, 2015 • Ad Materials Deadline: March 2, 2015

special section

Bonus DistributionaSNe day

Coast guard intelligence industry day

NExt ISSUE March 2015Volume 7, Issue 1

special Who’s Who pull-out supplement

A pictorial review of the Coast Guard’s senior leadership.

AdvancedHelicopterTrainer.com agustawestland.com

For the next generation of Naval aviators, a next generation helicopter

The Philadelphia-built AW119Kx is the most powerful light, single engine helicopter in its class, delivering the performance, safety and reliability demanded to train our most valuable asset – the next generation of Naval helicopter pilots. The AW119Kx provides basic helicopter fl ight training, cost effectively and without compromise. Built on a rugged and durable airframe, the superior power margins of the AW119Kx provide stable and forgiving handling characteristics while optimizing safety during training missions. The AW119Kx provides excellent visibility and features an integrated state-of-the-art glass cockpit that increases situational awareness and allows for a smooth transition to modern combat helicopters.Everything we do, we do with passion.

LEADING THE FUTURE

119

M-14-0144 AW119Kx Navy Trainer ad.indd 1 29/10/2014 16:15:28

CGF 6.5 (November 2014)

Documents

Transcript of CGF 6.5 (November 2014)