SOO C - OTT Remote and Rapid Rescue - 06172020.pdf

Remote and Rapid Rescue Statement of Objectives

17 June 2020

DISTRIBUTION NOTICE: Further dissemination only as directed by DHS Office of Policy DESTRUCTION NOTICE: Destroy by any method that will prevent disclosure of contents or reconstruction of the document.

Table of Contents

1.0 Problem Statement

2.0 Purpose and Scope

3.0 Background Environment

3.1 Mission Scenarios

3.2 Current Technology Shortfalls and Threats

4.0 Potential Solution Attributes

4.1 Concept of Operations (ConOps)

4.2 Additional Capabilities

5.0 Solution Capabilities and Requirements

5.1 Must Have Requirements (Key Performance Parameters, KPP’s)

5.2 Desirable Capabilities or Characteristics

6.0 System Support

6.1 Contractual Requirements

6.1.1 Period and Place of Performance

6.1.2 System Affordability

6.1.3 Regulatory/Legal Requirements

6.1.4 Contract Deliverables

6.2 6.2 Solution Support

6.2.1 Support Concept

6.2.2 Training

6.2.3 Other Considerations

6.2.4 Storage and Maintenance

1.0 Problem Statement

Currently, emergency responders use various search and rescue techniques that are often time-consuming and place the rescuers in harm’s way. There are multiple search and rescue types and each has varied techniques to accomplish the mission. For example, high angle technical rescue rope technique(s) used to rescue a hiker that is stranded on a cliff edge involve lowering ropes to the stranded person while a responder is lowered down the rope to assist, placing the responder in a vulnerable position. In a swift water rescue situation, responders must use devices or vehicles to reach and rescue persons trapped in rapidly moving water. The need for improved rescue capabilities is recognized in the Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS) Project Responder 5’s Casualty Management domain, which includes the need to provide “rapid and effective search and rescue”.1,2 Participants at the 2019 First Responder Resource Group (FRRG) Meeting further clarified and described the need for solutions that provide remote and rapid rescue support, thereby improving survivability of those being rescued and reducing the danger to responders.

Most rescue capabilities and techniques place responders at risk. Current capabilities are addressed in Section 3.0 Background Environment below. FRRG participants noted that unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) can potentially be used to remotely locate casualties. There are, however, significant obstacles associated with using UAS for rescue, including payload restrictions, cost concerns, time delay for air assets, and legal restrictions and regulations. Essentially, there is a need for a solution that can perform remote and rapid rescue that overcomes the barriers of existing technology and can be integrated with current tools and resources.

2.0 Purpose and Scope

The purpose of this statement of objectives document is to identify potential solutions that provide remote and rapid rescue tools that improve the survivability of casualties and increase responder safety. It is critical for emergency response teams to be able to rapidly locate and rescue casualties who are stranded or trapped because decreased rescue times provide better outcomes. The opportunity to enhance the safety of emergency responders through remote rescue is also key to decreasing injuries and death of emergency responders of all disciplines (i.e., law enforcement, fire, emergency medical services (EMS)) who have to respond to casualties that are situated in difficult-to-reach or dangerous-to-enter locations.

Responders at the 2019 FRRG Meeting discussed the need for a solution that can perform remote and rapid rescue while also overcoming existing technology barriers. Potential solutions should have the ability to operate on the ground, in the water, on ice, and in vertical (e.g., cliff-side) environments in order to cover a broad range of rescue situations. Further, any new solution should be rapidly deployable and able to transport a person. The solution must be of sufficient size and power to perform

1 Project Responder is a series of studies funded by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS)’s Science and Technology Directorate (S&T). The purpose of Project Responder is to identify, validate, and prioritize capability needs for emergency response to critical incidents, including complex, multi-jurisdictional, large-scale, high-risk, high-probability or high-consequence incidents, or incidents that have important social or economic impacts. Project Responder 5 is the current and fifth iteration in this series and is referenced in this document to help support and validate the capability needs identified by emergency responders at the 2019 FRRG Meeting.

2 Project Responder 5: Final Report, p.79, https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/Project-Responder-5- Report_170814-508.pdf https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/Project-Responder-5-Report_170814-508.pdf https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/Project-Responder-5-Report_170814-508.pdf a variety of rescue missions. Potential solutions must also be able to assist casualties if they are unable to actually rescue them. The ability to carry a payload that can deliver food, water, medicine and other supplies could significantly increase casualty survivability.

3.0 Background Environment

Responders of all disciplines may be responsible for locating and rescuing casualties during multiple types of incidents. Rescue environments can be broadly categorized as ground, mountain, cave, urban, combat, and maritime rescue, but there are many subsets of these categories. Sometimes, a particular response may even involve multiple types of rescues (e.g., ground and maritime). Search and rescue operations typically involve large areas (that may expand over time) with varying terrains that have different accessibility and visibility using traditional approaches. Traditional search capabilities include:

• Simple tools and bare hands;

• Physical void searches;

• Audible call-out;

• Search cameras and fiber optics/borescopes use, infrared/thermal imaging,

• Electronic listening devices; and

• Canines.3

Existing rescue tools include:

• Helicopters;

• Boats;

• Throw ropes and rings,

• Ladders;

• Ice commander suits;

• Horses;

• All-terrain vehicles (ATV);

• Snowmobiles;

• Jet skis;

• Inflatable safety platforms (e.g., jump bag, raft);

• Lifejackets; and

• Lifeboats.

The concern with most traditional approaches is that they can be time-consuming, require training, and oftentimes pose risk for emergency responders. For instance, a mountain rescue requires responders to understand resource requirements (e.g., how much rope is needed, if they have enough hardware, if they have adequate anchors); have proficiency with knots systems, patient packaging techniques and edge protection tactics; and maintain the ability to troubleshoot unexpected problems.

3 “Factors that affect rescue time in urban search and rescue (USAR) operations,” ResearchGate, viewed 15 May 2019, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/269289990_Factors_that_affect_rescue_time_in_urban_search_and_rescue_U SAR_operations https://www.researchgate.net/publication/269289990_Factors_that_affect_rescue_time_in_urban_search_and_rescue_USAR_operations https://www.researchgate.net/publication/269289990_Factors_that_affect_rescue_time_in_urban_search_and_rescue_USAR_operations

Further, these rescues often require responders to descend down the rope to assist casualties.4 This leaves room for error which increases risk for emergency responders and casualties alike.

Newer technology being used for rescue efforts includes robots and unmanned vehicles. In particular, UAS enable emergency responders to remotely identify and reach casualties situated in inaccessible or extremely dangerous areas without issues or risk. Although not used in the United States for rescue, this technology has the ability to deliver food, water or medical supplies to people that are trapped, but unreachable by searchers. Rescuers in Switzerland used a UAS that was specifically designed for search and rescue missions in mountainous and harsh weather conditions. The pixel pattern of images and video collected by the UAS are assessed to identify the potential location of humans. While specifically designed for similar missions, this system does not address the physical rescue or assistance capabilities that are central to this statement of objectives. Unmanned ground vehicles (UGVs) offer similar capabilities to UAS and some are referred to as “rescue robots.” Rescue robots are UGVs that have been designed for the purpose of supporting search and rescue efforts.5 Another type of unmanned vehicle is an unmanned maritime vehicle (UMV) which is similar to both UAS and UGV but operates in water. There are some existing UMVs that act as water rescue robots.

These are similar to mini-jet skis that multiple people can grab onto and be reeled back to shore or a rescue boat via a tow line.6 Other types of robots and unmanned vehicles that could be used to support rescue operations include law enforcement-specific (e.g., explosive ordnance disposal) and hazardous materials (HAZMAT) robotic systems. Although the ability to remotely rescue casualties may be supported through robots and unmanned vehicles, traditional rescue methods are used most often.

Emergency responders would like to see the incorporation of unmanned vehicles into day-to-day operations. However, there are several concerns with this technology (see section 3.2).

3.1 Mission Scenarios

Remote rescue capability may be used by all emergency responder disciplines in any incident in which there are casualties situated in difficult-to-access and/or dangerous locations. Specific incidents may include individuals trapped in a trench, tower, arroyo (i.e., natural waterway), swift or blue (open) waters, cave, mine, confined space, on a cliff or high-rise building, and in agricultural or industrial settings. The three most dangerous types of rescues include trench, swift water and confined space operations.7 Emergency rescue in agricultural or industrial environments may involve machines, confined spaces and HAZMAT which can also be quite dangerous and difficult.8 Rescues from towers, cliffs, and high-rise buildings may involve ropes, ladders, and helicopters, among other tools.

4 “ISOs & Technical Rescue Incidents,” FIRERESCUE, viewed 15 May 2019, https://www.firerescuemagazine.com/articles/print/volume-7/issue-5/technical-rescue-usar-0/isos-technical-rescue-incidents.html 5 “Fire, Rescue and HAZMAT Robots,” SDR Tactical, viewed 13 May 2019, http://sdrtactical.com/Fire-Rescue-and-

HAZMAT/

6 “Meet the US Navy’s Robotic Lifeguard Named ‘Emily’,” Military.com, viewed 13 May 2019, https://www.military.com/daily-news/2016/05/18/meet-the-us-navys-robotic-lifeguard-named-emily.html 7 “Search and Rescue Techniques,” Study Science Courses, viewed 16 May 2019, https://study.com/academy/lesson/search-rescue-techniques.html 8 “Emergency Rescue in an Agricultural Environment,” PennState, viewed 16 May 2019, https://extension.psu.edu/emergency-rescue-in-an-agricultural-environment http://sdrtactical.com/Fire-Rescue-and-HAZMAT/ http://sdrtactical.com/Fire-Rescue-and-HAZMAT/ https://www.military.com/daily-news/2016/05/18/meet-the-us-navys-robotic-lifeguard-named-emily.html https://study.com/academy/lesson/search-rescue-techniques.html https://extension.psu.edu/emergency-rescue-in-an-agricultural-environment

In all of these types of situations, the survival of casualties is strongly time-dependent, therefore the solution should be able to be rapidly deployed by emergency responders and enable them to perform a quick, life-saving rescue. In addition, most of these types of rescues currently involve putting emergency responders in vulnerable situations.

3.2 Current Technology Shortfalls and Threats

Participants at the 2019 FRRG Meeting noted that existing technology is inefficient and puts emergency responders at risk. There are numerous obstacles associated with UAS in particular that create barriers to fully transitioning the technology into the emergency responder’s arsenal. A significant barrier to this technology relates to the existence of federal rules and regulations. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) requires all government entities to obtain a Certificate of Waiver or Authorization (COA) for public UAS operations. The COAs can entail restrictions for use, even in the realm of emergency response. FAA regulations also restrict UAS vehicle size, weight, speed, and altitude, which emergency responders have noted as major shortfalls for this application.

Per FAA Part 107, in order for emergency responders to use these types of systems, they must either obtain a pilot certification or register as a civil aircraft and waive the COA. The FAA also restricts airspace near airports and other similar facilities, unless otherwise approved.9 In July of 2016, Congress passed additional UAS legislation that includes provisions related to emergency response.

Additional applicable standards include ISO/TC 20/SC16 regarding unmanned aircraft systems, and NFPA’s standard for small unmanned aircraft systems used for public safety operations (NFPA 2400), mentioned previously.10,11 Additional barriers to adoption of unmanned vehicles including: power, endurance, lift, size and payload concerns, arrival and deployment times, inability to operate in different environments (e.g., various types of topography, vegetation), ruggedness and durability concerns, inability to communicate between platforms and casualties, responder safety, and drone safety issues. Further, robotics technology is still immature and therefore a fully autonomous robot has not yet been developed. It may also be important to note that these types of systems often require considerable training, maintenance, and support for which responder agencies may not have the time or funding.

Finally, there is opposition to unmanned vehicles based on privacy concerns, safety, and public nuisance reasons which hinder the ability of response agencies fully adopt these technologies.

4.0 Potential Solution Attributes

Potential solutions will provide the ability to remotely and rapidly rescue and/or assist casualties that are located in difficult-to-access or dangerous areas. Specifically, the technology would be able to quickly deploy to locate the person, grab or hook on to them, and carry them to safety. The solution would be able to do this from the ground, in the water, and from the air as rescue missions may vary.

The solution would also carry payloads to assist casualties by delivering food, water, medicine, or

9 Project Responder 5: Final Report, p.43-45, https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/Project-Responder-5- Report_170814-508.pdf 10 “International Organization for Standardization,” ISO/TC 20/SC 16, viewed 15 May 2019, https://www.iso.org/committee/5336224.html 11 “National Fire Protection Association,” NFPA 2400, viewed 15 May 2019, https://www.nfpa.org/codes-and-standards/all-codes-and-standards/list-of-codes-and-standards/detail?code=2400 https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/Project-Responder-5-Report_170814-508.pdf https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/Project-Responder-5-Report_170814-508.pdf https://www.iso.org/committee/5336224.html https://www.nfpa.org/codes-and-standards/all-codes-and-standards/list-of-codes-and-standards/detail?code=2400 https://www.nfpa.org/codes-and-standards/all-codes-and-standards/list-of-codes-and-standards/detail?code=2400 other supplies crucial to survival. The technology should be unmanned to increase responder safety.

The solution would also operate in all types of response environments (e.g., smoky, windy, noisy, hazardous) that emergency responders face and be integrated with current tools or resources. Any proposed unmanned solutions should also address legal restrictions and regulations such as the Federal Aviation Administration’s (FAA) Part 107 which governs the commercial use of small UAS (sUAS) (i.e., defined as small unmanned aircraft weighing less than 55 pounds), the International Organization for Standardization’s (ISO) standard ISO/TC 20/SC16 regarding unmanned aircraft systems and also the National Fire Protection Association’s (NFPA) standard for small unmanned aircraft systems used for public safety operations (NFPA 2400).12,13,14

4.1 Concept of Operations (ConOps)

It is anticipated that the solution will be a remotely operated vehicle that provides rapid and unmanned rescue or assistance to casualties situated in inaccessible or dangerous areas. The solution may be operator-controlled to reach the casualty and then autonomously return to its base once the mission is completed. It should be able to be deployed rapidly (i.e., within minutes). Further, its size should be vehicle-portable or able to be lifted and/or manipulated by two people or less. The solution should have the ability to grab or hook onto a casualty and the ability to tow them in water or lift them onto a sled or other means for transport. This should not require much assistance from the person being rescued. The solution should also be able to carry a payload that can deliver food, water, medicine, and other supplies crucial to survival. It should also be able to provide two-way communication between the operator and the casualty with both audio and video capabilities. It should operate in any type of response environment.

4.2 Additional Capabilities

Potential solutions would extend the capability and availability of technical teams and build capacity for smaller jurisdictions. The solution would also reduce reflex/assessment time by increasing responder situational awareness and would be a force multiplier, requiring less man power, as the solution should be unmanned. Future applications could be integrated with triage efforts which are used at the scene of an accident or mass-casualty incidents to prioritize patients who need critical attention and immediate transport to a medical center. Potential solutions could be applied to active shooter situations as well. For instance, it could aid in more quickly and safely navigating dangerous corridors and hallways, locating and rescuing, or providing aid to casualties, prioritizing response efforts and even locating the shooter(s). It could also be used for disaster support in sending supplies to people that are stranded and cannot yet be rescued, in warzones to save soldiers on the battlefield, and in the private sector.

12 Project Responder 5: Final Report, p.43, https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/Project-Responder-5- Report_170814-508.pdf 13 “International Organization for Standardization,” ISO/TC 20/SC 16, viewed 15 May 2019, https://www.iso.org/committee/5336224.html 14 “National Fire Protection Association,” NFPA 2400, viewed 15 May 2019, https://www.nfpa.org/codes-and-standards/all-codes-and-standards/list-of-codes-and-standards/detail?code=2400 https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/Project-Responder-5-Report_170814-508.pdf https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/Project-Responder-5-Report_170814-508.pdf https://www.iso.org/committee/5336224.html https://www.nfpa.org/codes-and-standards/all-codes-and-standards/list-of-codes-and-standards/detail?code=2400 https://www.nfpa.org/codes-and-standards/all-codes-and-standards/list-of-codes-and-standards/detail?code=2400

5.0 Solution Capabilities and Requirements

5.1 Must Have Requirements (Key Performance Parameters, KPP’s) The proposed solution must:

• Deploy rapidly (within five minutes);

• Be a single-unit resource;

• Be able to be lifted and/or manipulated by two people or less;

• Provide two-way communication between the operator and the casualty with both audio and video capabilities (Note: NFPA 1802)15;

• Use a rechargeable power source;

• Generate its own lighting;

• Operate in day and/or night conditions;

• Recognize and avoid obstacles that may arise during missions;

• Autonomously return to base at a pre-established power level;

• Return to base once the mission is completed;

• Not interfere with communications systems;

• Comply with applicable Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and other Federal regulations and standards; and

• Comply with relevant National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) and other national-level consensus standards.

5.2 Desirable Capabilities or Characteristics

The proposed system should:

• Not exceed 100 pounds;

• Use batteries that are “hot-swappable” (if battery powered)16;

• Rapidly deploy a rescue kit to casualties;

• Maintain an operational range of at least one mile;

• Maintain a communication and controllability range of at least five miles;

• Operate between one and four hours both on the ground and in the air;

• Include modular sensors in order to allow for the ability to adapt, move, and add components and sensors together;

• Include electro-optical (EO) and/or infrared (IR) cameras;

• Record both audio and video;

• Require minimal training and certifications; and

• Be amphibious (e.g., duck or robot)

15 According to the NFPA, NFPA 1802 is the “standard on two-way, portable radio frequency (RF) voice communications devices for use by emergency services personnel in the hazard zone.”

16 “Hot-swappable” indicates that the devices’ batteries can be replaced without shutting the device down. Thus, the device can still be “hot” and running when the batteries are “swapped” out for new ones.

6.0 System Support

6.1 Contractual Requirements

6.1.1 Period and Place of Performance

The length of time of the contract shall be between 12-18 months and shall not exceed the latter. All developmental activities will be performed at the contractor-designated site(s). DHS may require the contractor to perform critical design reviews and/or product presentations at DHS-specified locations.

6.1.2 System Affordability

Emergency responders’ budgets are limited and should be taken into consideration when developing and determining a price per unit cost model.

6.1.3 Regulatory/Legal Requirements

The solution must meet the requirements laid out in:

• Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Part 107

• International Organization for Standardization’s (ISO) standard ISO/TC 20/SC16

• National Fire Protection Association’s (NFPA) standard for small unmanned aircraft systems used for public safety operations (NFPA 2400)

6.1.4 Contract Deliverables

It is expected that this project would be divided into three phases, with different deliverables required in each phase as described below. Each phase would be six months in length, resulting in a project lasting 18 months from kickoff to completion of prototypes.

DHS is committed to ensuring the success of their technology by requiring the project performer to provide DHS multiple prototype deliverables which will be used for post-contract testing and evaluation. A minimum of 50 prototype devices for evaluation by emergency responders shall be provided as a final project deliverable.

6.2 6.2 Solution Support

6.2.1 Support Concept

The technologies required to support this solution may include sensors, cameras, audio/video capabilities, potentially laptop computer and software, handheld controller, communications technology. Water resistant and other types of technology that ruggedize a device will be needed.

6.2.2 Training

Training information as required shall be provided on any specialized equipment, and shall include how to properly store, clean, deploy, and maintain the basic ensemble/unit. Any specialty requirements of personnel conducting maintenance, storage, extraction, or delivery will be identified including certification requirements. Training material shall be available initially in hard-copy, and subsequently in soft-copy format.

6.2.3 Other Considerations

Human Interface Requirements: The target user includes emergency responders of all disciplines (i.e., law enforcement, fire, EMS) that will respond to incidents in which casualties need to be rescued and assisted but are situated in inaccessible or dangerous locations. The solution should be operator-controlled to reach the casualty and should autonomously return to its base once the mission is completed. Its size should be vehicle portable or require more than two people for transport. It should also be able to provide two-way communication between the operator and the casualty with both audio and video capabilities. Finally, it will operate in any type of response environment faced and ideally be able to be transitioned/integrated with current tools/resources (e.g., placed on a firetruck).

Logistics and Readiness: The solution developed under this award is envisioned as either a new piece of equipment or an improved version of current offerings. It is envisioned that the solution will be unmanned and rapidly deployable as to increase survivability of casualties and increase responder safety. It should also be cost-effective so that emergency responders from a wide variety of jurisdictions will be able to afford it.

6.2.4 Storage and Maintenance

The contractor shall identify all necessary storage and maintenance requirements for the proposed solution including the required maintenance schedule, identification of the specific components of the ensemble that requires the maintenance, the type of maintenance required, and whether the maintenance can be performed in the field by operational personnel or if it will be required to be returned to the manufacturer for the required maintenance.

Physical solutions including PPE, shall include all special laundering instructions, including recommendations for frequency of laundering, should also be provided if required. Laundering recommendations should be viable and cost effective for first responders and responder agencies and should ideally be able to be performed “in house”.

If the proposed solution is virtual, describe any storage or maintenance requirements, including archival activities, and the personnel performance needs associated with the solution.