Three years after the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) terminated a program aimed at developing and producing the next-generation of portal systems to detect radiological threats hidden in cargo and vehicles, dozens of the Advanced Spectroscopic Portals (ASP) are being used in operations and for scientific research, a department official said on Tuesday.
Following cancellation of the program in 2011, 36 ASPs purchased through low-rate production are now being used by universities and the national laboratories for research and others are being used overseas by the Energy Department as part of its Second Line of Defense operations to scan cargo at international seaports, Huban Gowadia, director of the Domestic Nuclear Detection Office (DNDO), tells the House Homeland Security Subcommittee on Cybersecurity, Infrastructure Protection, and Security Technologies. “They continue to be operated in the field for overseas scanning operations,” she says.
Gowadia also says that DNDO has given five of the portal monitors to five states, Georgia, Tennessee, Mississippi, Missouri, and New Mexico, and plans to provide two to California. At least two of these states, California and New Mexico, have separately purchased radiation portal monitors for use in helping to guard against the illicit transport of radiological and special nuclear materials that could be used for weapons of mass destruction or dirty bombs.
A DHS official tells HSR that the systems transferred to the states were built by Raytheon [RTN] and are being used to scan trucks at weigh stations. Raytheon was one of three contractors for ASP.
In addition to the portal systems, nine mobile SUV-mounted advanced spectroscopic detection systems were built as part of the ASP program. Gowadia says these systems have been put to use in various states, including New York, the Washington, DC area, Alabama, Virginia and Florida. The mobile systems in the New York area are being used as part of the Securing the Cities program.
New Jersey has separately acquired mobile radiation detection systems as well.
Overall, “These systems have served as a means to gather important technical data, operational data, and maintenance data,” Gowadia says. “And they will certainly factor in to all of our technology programs moving forward, our acquisition programs moving forward, and in fact they will inform our Analysis of Alternatives for whatever we will do next for our radiation portal monitors.”
DNDO originally selected three contractors to compete for ASP development and testing work, including Canberra Industries
, Raytheon and Thermo Fisher Scientific [TMO]. Canberra was dropped prior to the program being cancelled and DNDO said when the program was ended that the Raytheon systems would be used for further evaluations.
The DHS official tells HSR that 66 fixed ASP systems were built by the three contractors during the low-rate production phase of the program. The systems that were not transferred for testing or operational use are being “harvested” for spare parts and components in support of the other systems, the official says.
“DNDO continues to find significant interest from the greater radiological and nuclear detection law enforcement and research communities to utilize the ASP systems for the advancement of detection capabilities,” the DHS official says.
DHS ultimately cancelled the program because it didn’t meet requirements at ports of entry in the U.S., including truck speeds. Prior to cancellation of ASP and another major radiation detection program known as CAARS, officials from Customs and Border Protection (CBP), the agency that would have been the primary user of the systems, frequently complained through official channels that they had not been included up front in the requirements development process.
Gowadia also says that the most of the lessons learned from the ASP had to do with proper acquisition, adding that here the agency’s “discipline” in this respect has been “turned up.”
GAO Issues with DNDO
David Trimble, director of National Resources and Environment at the Government Accountability Office, tells the panel that DNDO has taken steps to better coordinate its research and development efforts internally, with other federal research agencies, and with end users of radiation detection systems. However, he cautions that DNDO may face challenges communication with some end users.
The Transportation Security Administration Coast Guard officials GAO spoke with are “generally satisfied” with the coordination they have with DNDO’s R&D branch while CBP, the largest user of radiation detection technologies within DHS, “told us they are generally dissatisfied with the level of interaction with TAR (Transformational and Applied Research Directorate),” Trimble says.
However, harking back to CBP’s complaints about ASP and CAARS, Trimble says that “CBP officials stated that they typically do not learn about the TAR Directorate’s projects until after the project requirements are written and research contracts are issued and, in some cases, has found that project requirements would not meet CBP’s operational needs if the technology were deployed at ports of entry.” He adds that CBP would prefer to work with TAR throughout the research process to better understand “research goals and to help ensure that its R&D projects align with CBP’s operational needs.”
Trimble says GAO is preparing a report on DNDO’s internal and external communications efforts for release in December.