|
 |
Homeland Security Focus Areas
Sensors and Detection
Jul 17, 2003
U.S. Focus: Sensors in U.S. Cities
Bioterrorism devices debated Air scoured for lethal agents
BY DAVID B. CARUSO
THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
PHILADELPHIA At secret locations in at least 31 cities, the government
has deployed devices that scour the air for deadly agents such as anthrax
and smallpox with hopes of sniffing out bioterrorism. But the effort has
been viewed with skepticism.
Some security experts said the system is unlikely to catch a bioterrorism
attack in time to save many lives. And they said it is powerless to spot
an attack in an enclosed area, like an airport terminal or subway line,
and unable to detect attacks unless they are big enough to scatter over
several blocks.
"If you saw planes going over and releasing major clouds of this
stuff, there's a chance that people would get suspicious a long time before
anybody checked the filters," said Jacqueline Cattani, director of
the Center for Biological Defense at the University of South Florida.
The sensors have been in place since early spring, and while the government
won't say exactly where, regional health officials confirmed the list
includes Philadelphia, New York, Washington, San Diego, Boston, Chicago,
San Francisco and St. Louis.
The White House in January said the "Biowatch" monitoring system
would cost about $1 million annually per city.
In participating cities, filters within the machines are removed daily
and immediately analyzed for spores and chemicals that could have been
dumped from a plane or building and left to drift in the air.
If an attack was close enough to a sensor, authorities could know about
it within 12 hours, according to Bob Bostock, homeland-security chief
for the Environmental Protection Agency. That is much faster than it would
take people exposed to anthrax to develop symptoms, he said.
"The main advantage or having a system like Biowatch is that prior
to it being rolled out, the only real way to tell if a biological agent
had been released was to see if people started turning up sick or worse,"
Bostock said. "By knowing in advance that a contaminant has been
released, you can start treating it before symptoms develop."
Much about the system is being kept secret; The government won't say who
makes the detectors, how much they cost, or what they look like. Officials
also won't say which labs are analyzing the detectors' filters, other
than to say that some are operated by state health departments.
If a filter tests positive for a particle, scientists can estimate where
it came from, based on its physical properties, Bostock said.
The system, though, has plenty of critics.
Calvin Chue, a researcher at the Center for Civilian Biodefense Strategies
at Johns Hopkins University, said the cost of testing and replacing the
filters daily will be high and the probability of spotting a contaminant
low. He also said the results will be difficult to confirm, especially
in polluted cities or places where natural organisms found in the air
can give false-positive results.
Researchers who studied what would happen if someone dropped 2.2 pounds
of anthrax from a tall building in New York said the sensors could save
lives, but only if officials detected an attack immediately and instantly
began distributing medication.
Stanford Business School professor Lawrence Wein said in that scenario,
the number of dead could be cut from 120,000 to 70,000 if sensors detected
an attack within six hours. He said deaths could be cut to 50,000 if the
government allowed people to stockpile antidotes ahead of time.
Bostock wouldn't discuss how the detectors have performed so far, but
he said the monitors have neither detected an attack, nor produced the
type of false-positive reading that triggers an emergency response.
"We have a high degree of confidence in the results we have been
getting," he said.
DHS, National Laboratories Working on National WMD Sensor Network
Scientists at the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the Department
of Energy's (DOE) national laboratories are working to develop a nationwide
sensor network that would provide early warning of nuclear, chemical,
and biological threats to the United States, according to a 14 July EE
Times report. Research has been underway for over a year on materials
and sensors, and testing has occurred on some prototype networks, though
details will not likely be made public until later this year. Researchers
are studying the use of microelectromechanical systems and nanotechnology
to create an integrated suite of low cost, highly accurate biological
and chemical sensors that would be connected by an Internet-like network
spanning wireless, wired and satellite links. A program manager at Los
Alamos National Labs commented, "Some people want to find one little
box that will do everything, but we need to focus on a family of technologies."
He estimated that 40 percent of an over-all government allocation of $2
billion to $3 billion will fund new detection systems.
ANALYSIS: While the goal of deploying a national network is likely to
be three to five years away, component technologies could be deplored
earlier. A team from the Oak Ridge National Laboratory in Oak Ridge, Tennessee
has installed the "SensorNet," a system of about 20 sensor packages,
around Washington, D.C. at secret locations that include rooftops, cellular
phone towers and at street-level that can detect chemical, biological
and radioactive agents. The experimental system, which could possibly
lead to a national detection system, is scheduled to be operational by
August. Other trial sensor networks are in place in Boston subways, San
Francisco airport, the port of Miami, and a chemical-sensor system recently
went operational on the Washington, D.C. subway. Sandia is currently testing
handheld sensors designed to detect within two minutes chemical-weapons
agents with "unprecedented sensitivity" and is exploring adding
networking and GPS capability to the sensors.
New Technologies for Soldier and
First Responder Personal Protection
The U.S. Army Natick Soldier Center (NSC) National Protection Center
(NPC) and Worcester Polytechnic Institute (WPI) signed an agreement to
identify, develop and evaluate personal protection concepts and foster
technology development and engineering of products - such as biosensors
for medical monitoring - for soldiers and emergency responders. The agreement
is effective through 2006.
"Recent history has taught us some really harsh lessons," said
Rita González, NPC director. "Keeping our folks protected,
out of harm's way, or being able to find rescuers lost in debris is high
on the national priority list."
NSC's is known for its innovative programs that foresee needs and prepare
for the future warrior. NSC looks at the soldier as a system and addresses
soldier protection by working to develop a fully integrated, protective
ensemble.
WPI contributes high-quality science and engineering programs and expertise,
some of which are focused on the technology needs of firefighters and
soldiers. WPI's new bioengineering institute was the impetus for seeking
the partnership with Natick, said Jim Matthews, with WPI's external and
government affairs office.
"There is a lot of cutting-edge research at Natick that would be
helpful with students and faculty," he said. "The institute's
Center for Untethered Healthcare is most likely to initially benefit in
areas such as firefighting and physiological monitoring."
Bill Haskell, senior engineer with the NPC, sees great value in this relationship.
"Being able to track and monitor people is a technical priority for
warfighters and emergency responders," he said. "It's an area
of interest for both Natick Soldier Center and WPI, just ripe for collaboration."
Haskell is highly involved in advancing the protection needs of the National
Fire Protection Association, International Association of Fire Fighters,
Federal Emergency Management Agency Urban Search and Rescue Teams, and
others in the national emergency response community.
"The NPC is the NSC's gateway to fostering technology partnerships
in the area of individual protection. Through the NPC, NSC acknowledges
the equal value of military or civilian lives," González said.
"When responding to emergencies, we should all be equally protected
and afforded the best available technology. If the NSC can protect the
soldier under the most demanding and threatening of conditions, it can
provide, through the right mix of partnerships and support, the same quality
of personal protection for all who need it, when they need it."
NSC and WPI plan to accomplish their goals through academic-enhancing
programs and joint engineering projects. Both organizations will be able
to share facilities and equipment as needed, and encourage partnerships
with other academic or government institutions and consumers of protective
technology.
From the "Congressional Quarterly Homeland Security Daily,"
14 July:
Postal Service Begins Anthrax-Detection Tests
The Postal Service will begin testing a new anthrax-detection system
on July 14 in fifteen cities, the Associated Press reported Friday. The
Biohazard Detection System, developed after the fall 2001 anthrax attacks,
collects samples of air as letters move through mail processing equipment.
DNA tests are then used to test the airborne particles for anthrax, the
report said. The test will last four weeks and will not involve the use
of actual or simulated hazardous substances, the AP said. Based on results
of the tests, the anthrax detection system could be deployed at other
mail handling facilities beginning in 2004. - Anjali Cordeiro
Biodetectors sniff out deadly airborne agents
BY Judi Hasson
July 7, 2003
The Defense Department is deploying a new technology that sniffs out
deadly airborne chemicals and biological agents.
Known as the Remote Data Relay (RDR), the system uses a network of sensors
to collect and analyze air samples around a military installation (or
any other location that is pinpointed), according to officials at Sentel
Corp., the company supplying the technology.
The Alexandria, Va.-based engineering company connects hundreds of disparate
sensors in remote locations to a center where air testing is analyzed
and monitored.
Using RDR's software, officials can monitor the sensors from a central
command post or remote sites without sending anyone into harm's way. The
network is intended as an instant alarm for people who may already have
been exposed to a deadly weapon, not a way to stop an ongoing biological
attack.
"The whole point of biodetection is detection for treatment,"
said James Garrett, Sentel's founder, president and chief executive officer.
Once poisonous agents are detected, officials can warn people to get
inoculated or treated immediately. In the case of smallpox exposure, for
example, people have about four days to get a vaccination that will prevent
an outbreak.
Now in use at various places worldwide, Sentel's technology is used by
the military to protect "high profile" locations and people,
Garrett said. He declined to say where the system is used, or even if
it was deployed during the recent war in Iraq. However, he said it can
detect at least 10 chemical and biological agents.
That's a far cry from the past. During World War I, soldiers were issued
primitive gas masks and brought pigeons into battle to help detect gas.
If the birds died, it was a warning that the enemy had released toxins
into the battlefield.
Charles McQueary, the Homeland Security Department's undersecretary for
science and technology, told Congress in May that biological attacks are
among the most serious threats facing the United States. In fact, President
Bush's 2004 budget request includes a major increase in funding to develop
bioterrorism countermeasures to protect the population.
McQueary said it is imperative to provide "state-of-the-art, high-performance,
low-operating-cost systems to rapidly detect and mitigate the consequences
of the release of biological and chemical agents."
There is a simple reason why biological weapons are feared, according
to a top official for the Naval Surface Warfare Center who declined to
be identified.
"It is cheaper to manufacture a biological weapon than a chemical
or nuclear weapon," the official said.
This is why the government is keeping a close eye on American cities
and ports to ensure that they are protected from biological terrorism.
"We must prevent catastrophic attacks against the American people
that could involve chemical, biological or nuclear materials," said
Rep. Jim Turner (D-Texas), the ranking Democrat on the House Select Committee
on Homeland Security. "Every major city in America should have detection
devices and specialized equipment to neutralize the effects of a chemical
attack."
Although it might be good business to deploy Sentel's technology nationwide,
Garrett acknowledged that it is not a practical idea. Public health and
law enforcement officials have to make calculated decisions on where to
place the technological tool. "You can't really afford to have biodetectors
everywhere," he said.
It is possible to target the places that are high-risk and put the system
in place there. Sentel was responsible for providing biological protection
in 1993 at President Clinton's gala inaugural festivities at the former
US Air Arena. More recently, it was deployed in Washington, D.C., for
a major NATO event. Following the attack on USS Cole in Yemen, it's been
used to detect contamination at seaports of debarkation.
Meanwhile, the Bush administration is ratcheting up its own efforts at
biodetection. President Bush has proposed Project BioShield, which is
moving through Congress and would spur development of large amounts of
vaccines to treat smallpox, anthrax, Ebola, plague and other pathogens.
It also would allow the Food and Drug Administration to authorize the
widespread use of experimental drugs in the case of a bioterrorist attack.
***
Sensor integration
As concerns rise over bioterrorism threats, some federal agencies are
turning to Sentel Corp. for chemical and biological defense technology.
A popular tool in the company's arsenal is the Remote Data Relay, which
integrates sensors that analyze the air quality for toxins in a network.
Using RDR's Command Post software, personnel can monitor sensors from
a central or remote location.
The RDR consists of a radio modem, Ethernet connection and a personal
computer, all packaged in a case the size of a breadbox. RDR runs off
of various power sources, such as a utility power line or 12- or 24-volt
battery pack, or from a vehicle's DC electrical system. By plugging in
cables, as many as 11 devices can be connected to a single RDR. Forty
RDRs can be connected to the command post to configure a network of over
400 remote sensors.
Military System for Detecting Chem/Bio Agents has Homeland Security
Applications
The Pentagon is deploying a force protection system against chemical
and biological agents released into the air that could be used to protect
US populations as well, according to a 7 July Federal Computer Week report.
According to the system's developer, Alexandria, Virginia-based Sentel
Corporation, the Remote Data Relay (RDR) system employs a network of sensors
that collects and analyzes air samples at designated sites allowing them
to be monitored for chemical or biological agents from a central facility
or remote sites. Consisting of a radio modem, Ethernet connection and
a personal computer, the system can detect at least 10 chemical and biological
agents, provide an instantaneous alarm and minimize exposure. The system
was deployed recently for a NATO event in Washington, D.C. and has been
used at targeted seaports since the attack on the USS Cole in Yemen. .
ANALYSIS: The Department of Homeland Security's (DHS) Undersecretary
for Science and Technology Charles McQueary characterized biological attacks
as among the most serious threats facing the United States, and recently
said, "It is imperative to provide "state-of-the-art, high-performance,
low-operating-cost systems to rapidly detect and mitigate the consequences
of the release of biological and chemical agents." While the RDR
system appears to meet most of these criteria, Sentel's founder James
Garrett said it may not be practical to widely apply the system to civilian
use, due to cost. "You can't really afford to have biodectors everywhere,"
he told Federal Computer Week. That is contrary to the thinking of some
Washington lawmakers. Emphasizing that "catastrophic attacks against
the American people that could involve chemical, biological or nuclear
materials" must be prevented, Rep. Jim Turner (D-Texas), the ranking
Democrat on the House Select Committee on Homeland Security said, "Every
major city in America should have detection devices and specialized equipment
to neutralize the effects of a chemical attack."
Feds Want See-Through Security
EGG HARBOR TOWNSHIP, N.J., June 26, 2003
Susan Hallowell steps into a metal booth that bounces X-rays off her
skin, producing a black-and-white image that reveals enough to produce
a world-class blush.
To the eye, she is dressed in a skirt and blazer in dark, businesslike
colors.
On the monitor, the director of the Transportation Security Administration's
security laboratory is naked, except for a gun and a bomb that she had
hidden under her outfit.
The government is considering using the technology at airport security
checkpoints because the magnetometers now in use cannot detect plastic
weapons or substances used in explosives.
Hallowell is sacrificing her modesty to make a point: Air travelers are
not going to like being technologically undressed by security screeners.
"It does basically make you look fat and naked - but you see all
this stuff," Hallowell said Wednesday during a demonstration of the
technology.
The technology is called "backscatter" because it scatters
X-rays. Doses of rays deflected off dense materials such as metal or plastic
produce a darker image than those deflected off skin. The radiation dosage
is about the same as sunshine, Hallowell said.
Backscatter machines have been available on the market for years. They
are priced at between $100,000 and $200,000 and used in all sorts of security
situations, from screening families of convicts visiting prisons to South
African diamond miners going home for the day.
The agency is trying to find a way to modify the machines with an electronic
fig leaf - programming that fuzzes out sensitive body parts or distorts
the body so it is unrecognizable.
Another option might mean stationing the screener in a booth so only
he sees the image, said Randal Null, the agency's chief technology officer.
Null hopes to conduct pilot programs with backscatter machines at several
airports this year. A pilot project at Orlando International Airport in
Florida using volunteers met with mixed results, he said.
Some volunteers were uncomfortable with it. For others, "It was
a whole lot nicer than having someone pat me down," he said.
David Sobel, general counsel for the Electronic Privacy Information Center
in Washington, thinks most people will object to the backscatter technology.
"The public is willing to accept a certain amount of scrutiny at
the airport, but there are clearly limits to the degree of invasion that
is acceptable," Sobel said. "It's hard to understand why something
this invasive is necessary."
But Rep. John Mica, chairman of the House Transportation and Infrastructure
subcommittee on aviation, thinks it is essential because of the strong
likelihood that a terrorist will try to bomb a plane.
"I predict it will happen," said Mica, R-Fla. "The chances
of someone bringing an explosive on an aircraft by walking through a metal
detector or in hand-carried luggage are very real."
Mica pointed out that Richard Reid, convicted of trying to blow up a
trans-Atlantic jetliner with explosives in his shoes, walked through metal
detectors at Orly Airport in Paris several times before boarding the plane.
Federal transportation security officials say a backscatter scanner could
have foiled Reid.
For now, Mica is trying to persuade colleagues to require that the transportation
agency focus its research on technology that identifies items on people's
bodies.
Null said the agency's major focus is already on detecting explosives
and weapons at airport checkpoints.
In the end, the biggest problem with the backscatter machines may be
their size, he said. One version, the BodySearch system made by Billerica,
Mass.-based American Science & Engineering is about 4-feet by 7-feet
by 10-feet - awfully big for an airport lobby, Null said.
Another system made by Hawthorne, Calif.-based OSI Systems is more compact.
CQ HOMELAND SECURITY - BORDER SECURITY
June 19, 2003 - 7:40 p.m.
Mexican Day Workers Still Crossing the Old Fashioned Way
By Jeremy Torobin, CQ Staff Writer
Nearly nine months after Mexicans on short visits here were supposed
to be required to carry biometric laser visas, appropriators and southern-border
lawmakers are still waiting for the Bureau of Customs and Border Protection
to outline its plans to deploy scanners to read them.
To replace the laminated paper crossing cards that went out of date on
Oct. 1, 2002, the State Department has sold more than six million laser
visas at $100 each to frequent crossers.
The visa has two fingerprints and a digital photograph embedded on the
back.
So far, however, only about 30 scanners have been deployed to a handful
of southern ports of entry.
Everywhere else along the U.S.-Mexican border, officers continue to examine
the cards visually, as they always have.
"The previous cards were like driver's licenses, you'd hold them
up and show your picture," Cathy Travis, a spokeswoman for Rep. Solomon
P. Ortiz, D-Texas, who co-chairs the House Border Caucus, said Thursday.
"Now, instead of having a biometric card that scans it and tells
us who you really are, they've got a biometric card that people show just
like a driver's license."
In 2001, Congress gave the former Immigration and Naturalization Service
(INS) $10.6 million to buy enough scanners for the entire southern border.
But so far, according to a House Homeland Security Appropriations Subcommittee
aide, the former INS, now split among the Bureau of Customs and Border
Protection and two other Homeland Security divisions, has spent little
more than $1 million to purchase 30 of the machines from two companies
and run a pilot project.
Last fall, the former INS tested 24 scanners made by Annandale, Va.-based
Information Spectrum, Inc. and six made by Denver-based BSI2000, Inc.
The manufacturer of the cards, LaserCard Systems Corp. in Mountain View,
Calif., is a subsidiary of Information Spectrum.
Testing took place over two months at Los Angeles International Airport,
San Antonio International Airport, Hartsfield Atlanta International Airport
and at land crossings in San Ysidro, Calif., Nogales, Ariz., and Falcon
Dam, Texas.
Card Trick
"The border crossing cards have a storage feature that's apparently
fairly robust in what it can contain . . . but the capability to exploit
the storage is not there," the appropriations aide said Thursday.
To push DHS along, language in the wartime supplemental spending law signed
in April ordered that the BCBP report by May 1 on its plans to deploy
the readers.
Still waiting for that report, the House subcommittee raised the issue
again in a report accompanying its version of the fiscal 2004 spending
bill that funds DHS and its programs, which the full committee approved
on June 18, directing that the report be "completed and delivered
as soon as possible."
"We've asked to have it as soon as possible, and we expect to see
it," the aide said.
Hutchinson Boasted
DHS Undersecretary Asa Hutchinson even boasted about the cards last month
in a speech about the department's plans to use biometrics to track the
entry and departure of certain foreign visitors.
Hutchinson said "a recent pilot program to decode the cards resulted
in the capture of 250 impostors trying to cheat the system," and
pledged, "We will make sure that the right equipment and training
is in place to make it work on a large scale."
DHS officials in Washington could not be reached Thursday for comment
on how soon the report will reach appropriators.
But Art Moreno, a spokesman for the BCBP in Harlingen, Texas, said the
regional office there - which covers 11 ports of entry along the U.S.-Mexican
border - has heard nothing about when more machines will arrive.
"Inspectors are still using the manual readers," Moreno said.
"They can't take the person's photograph or fingerprints, but then
again, they've got the person before them, so they're just as effective."
However, Moreno conceded, inspectors in the region where he works encounter
an average of 400 fraud cases a month.
And although the machine used in the pilot project at Falcon Dam recently
was sent to the port of entry at nearby Roma, it's sitting idle because
technicians haven't arrived yet to hook it up, he said.
Unmanned Drones Explored for Border Use
Associated Press
WASHINGTON - The agency responsible for making sure that terrorist weapons,
drugs and people aren't smuggled into the United States is exploring the
possibility of using unmanned aerial drones.
Robert Bonner, commissioner of the Bureau of Customs and Border Protection,
told a House Homeland Security subcommittee Monday that makes sense to
conduct a pilot program using unmanned aerial vehicles, or drones.
Bonner, who said he would be briefed on the question, said his agency
still needs to examine how useful drones would be in helping to police
the borders as well as how cost effective they would be.
``I do expect we'll do some sort of pilot in the near term,'' Bonner said
in an interview after the hearing. He said the technology is being looked
at ``to enhance our detection capability, particularly at our land borders.''
Bonner also said more Border Patrol agents are needed, although he does
not yet know how many are needed. Roughly 10,000 Border Patrol agents
currently are deployed along the southwestern and northern borders, the
General Accounting Office says.
The Bureau of Customs and Border Protection, part of the Homeland Security
Department, was formed on March 1 and now includes the Border Patrol as
well as agriculture, immigration and customs inspectors.
On other issues, Bonner said the government is working to expand a program
to improve the security of sea cargo coming into the United States. It
also wants to work out agreements with Latin American countries, such
as Panama, Argentina and Brazil, that would place customs inspectors at
those ports and screen cargos bound for this country.
Most current agreements cover ports in Europe and Asia.
The United States already has expressed interest in expanding the sea-container
security program to include some ports in the Middle East, such as those
of the United Arab Emirates.
Bonner also said an array of technologies is being used to augment pocket-sized
radiation detectors is in the bureau's efforts to make sure that nuclear
weapons aren't smuggled in by terrorists or others.
``We found that some of the radiation detection equipment being used -
radiation pagers - have a limited range and are not designed to detect
weapons-usable nuclear material,'' Richard Stana, director of homeland
security and justice issues at the General Accounting Office, said Monday
in testimony to the panel.
On other issues, Rep. Edward Markey, D-Mass., repeated his misgivings
that overseas cargo brought into the United States aboard passenger planes
is not screened for explosives or other deadly weapons. Congress, which
set deadlines for screening passengers and their luggage, has not done
the same for cargo.
After the hearing, Bonner said his bureau has no system in place to screen
overseas cargo on passenger planes, but such cargo is screened when planes
arrive in the United States.
Navy Awards Contract to ObjectVideo for Enhanced Video Surveillance
System
Reston, Virginia-headquartered ObjectVideo(tm), a developer of intelligent
video software for physical security applications, announced on 4 June
"that it has been awarded a three-year contract to jointly develop
sophisticated new surveillance software as part of a U.S. Navy program
to take innovative approaches to protecting ships in port from terrorist
attacks." The contract, awarded by the Office of Naval Research for
the Small Business Innovation Research (ONR SBIR) Phase II Project, calls
on ObjectVideo to "provide surveillance systems, including a 360-degree
camera, that will allow a ship's security watch (Watchstanders) to detect
and respond rapidly and appropriately to potentially threatening movements
of other sea vessels." The company will integrate its VEW (Video
Early Warning) software with the camera to develop the surveillance system.
VEW is intelligent video surveillance technology that "is capable
of accurately detecting, identifying and analyzing objects captured on
video automatically and in real-time. The technology's utilization of
computer vision "significantly reduces false alarm rates while markedly
increasing the effectiveness of security professionals."
ANALYSIS: Conventional radar systems used to detect threats to naval
ships are not permitted in many ports. At those ports where radars are
allowed, they still can still be ineffective surveillance systems because
of the high volume of ground and water traffic and clutter at busy ports,
Washington Technology reported. The ObjectVideo contract seeks to overcome
these limitations by deploying a VEW-enhanced omni-camera on ship masts,
the company said. ObjectVideo CEO Clara Conti said, "The ability
to effectively monitor activity in port is critical for naval vessels
as they are most vulnerable to terrorist threats when they are in port.
The attack on the USS Cole demonstrated the threat to ships in port posed
by terrorists...By bringing a new level of surveillance capabilities to
these ships, ObjectVideo's technology can detect, track and classify threats
and immediately notify the Watchstander, so these types of attacks can
be prevented." The company announced in March that it had won a contract
to install video surveillance systems "at various ports of entry
in Washington State" as well as at "installations across the
entire Northern Border" as part of a Department of Homeland Security
Bureau of Customs and Border Protection initiative.
Expansion Continues of 'DCNet' Sensor Network
An expanding network of sensors positioned in the Washington metropolitan
area and New York City are providing researchers and homeland security
officials with continuous monitoring data to warm them of possible airborne
chemical, biological, or radiological terrorist attacks, Newsbytes reported
on 2 June. In what officials describe as the most comprehensive wind analysis
attempted in any U.S. city, sensors have been placed atop government buildings
near sensitive sites in Washington, DC, Arlington, VA, and Silver Spring,
MD, in an effort to forecast how urban "wind fields" might disperse
fallout from the detonation of an unconventional terrorist weapon, the
report said. Among the six sites reportedly being monitored in the early
stages of the project, called "DCNet," are the White House,
Capitol Hill, the Pentagon, the National Mall, the National Zoo, and the
National Arboretum. Two sites in New York City, reportedly in Times Square
and in Greenwich Village, are reportedly also operating. According to
Bruce Hicks, director of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's
(NOAA) Silver Spring-headquartered Air Resources Laboratory, which created
the system, "The Washington exercise is seen as a prototype of what
could eventually be a nationwide program." Hick added, "The
system now in place offers this area an unparalleled capability to plan
for possible attacks and to respond if one were to occur." The operating
network comprises strategically placed 30-foot aluminum weather towers
holding ultrasonic sensors that measure wind speed and direction 10 times
a second, the report said. The system can reportedly generate wind maps
every 15 minutes - faster in case of an emergency - showing exposure patterns
over a 16-square-mile grid.
ANALYSIS: As with many homeland security tech solutions, DCNet needs
funding. DCNet's builders have asked the Department of Homeland Security
for $2 million to $10 million to build out a system of 75 to 175 towers
throughout the Washington-Baltimore area, Newsbytes reported. Without
additional funding, detailed analyses of and improvements to existing
dispersion models "will take years," the report said. Although
DCNet began only in April 2002, researchers have already made some important
discoveries, including "a large wind-direction difference, or bias,
between downtown Washington and Reagan National Airport, which is the
official source of weather information for the capital." According
to one DCNet official, "If you used the airport data, you have a
really good chance of having a forecast plume go in the wrong direction."
While more towers are reportedly planned for DCNet, it is not clear how
homeland security funding constraints might affect the network's expansion.
Sensors May Track Terror's Fallout
Region Gets First Fallout Sensors
By Spencer S. Hsu
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, June 2, 2003; Page A01
In preparation for a terrorist attack, federal scientists have installed
sensors to map wind currents in downtown Washington, Arlington and Silver
Spring, the first deployment of a high-tech network to help predict the
airborne path of a chemical, biological or radioactive release.
A half-dozen aluminum weather towers, each 30 feet tall, have been installed
atop government buildings in what officials describe as the most comprehensive
wind analysis attempted in any U.S. city. With more towers planned, the
sensors are being positioned near sensitive sites -- including Capitol
Hill, the White House, the Pentagon, the Mall, the National Zoo and the
National Arboretum -- and on cellular relay towers within the Capital
Beltway.
The goal is to forecast how urban "wind fields" might disperse
fallout from a weapon of mass destruction. The ultrasonic sensors sample
the wind 10 times a second, with the data downloaded every 15 minutes
and available to emergency planners and scientists nationwide.
Government-threat analysts repeatedly have warned of the potential use
of unconventional weapons such as a radiological device, or "dirty
bomb," against populated areas. But until now, tools precise enough
to help officials respond to a local atmospheric release have remained
rudimentary, two federal scientific panels concluded.
"The Washington exercise is seen as a prototype of what could eventually
be a nationwide program," said Bruce B. Hicks, who heads the National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's air resources laboratory, which
created the system, called DCNet. "The system now in place offers
this area an unparalleled capability to plan for possible attacks and
to respond if one were to occur."
A small team of federal researchers, based in Silver Spring and Oak Ridge,
Tenn., operates the $500,000 network. Separately, as part of a $3 million
program called SensorNet, the U.S. Department of Energy has added gamma-radiation
detectors to the towers, testing the feasibility of their use in thwarting
a radiological attack.
In NOAA's experiment, researchers began making the eight-hour drive from
their Tennessee laboratory to Washington in April 2002, gaining approvals
and installing the towers at strategic sites. One tower, visible from
the State Department, sits tridentlike atop the National Academy of Sciences
Building on Constitution Avenue near the Vietnam Veterans Memorial. The
system also includes two sites in Manhattan -- Times Square and a federal
building in Greenwich Village.
Each cellular-modem-equipped spire uses sound waves emitted from three
prongs to get precise readings of wind speed and direction. Wind, or the
lack of it, speeds up or slows down the ultrasonic chirp.
Those lags or accelerations are timed and beamed to Internet sites maintained
by NOAA in Tennessee. Loaded into a computer there, the data are turned
into wind maps posted within 15 minutes, faster in case of an emergency.
In that instance, a computer model could generate a plume in red, orange
and yellow blobs, with each widening ring denoting the probability of
hazardous exposure over a four-mile-by-four-mile grid.
Will Pendergrass, the meteorologist in charge, said field engineer Randy
White and systems specialist Ed Dumas were surprised at an early finding
of their work. New stations detected a large wind-direction difference,
or bias, between downtown Washington and Reagan National Airport, which
is the official source of weather information for the capital.
Twelve months of readings found that airport winds generally flow up and
down the Potomac River, while readings downtown consistently "vary
from that by 40 to 90 degrees," Pendergrass said: "If you used
the airport data, you have a really good chance of having a forecast plume
go in the wrong direction."
D.C. emergency managers who would be responsible for recommending an evacuation
are closely monitoring results with the Energy Department's Lawrence Livermore
National Laboratory, the National Weather Service and about 30 government
and university researchers.
"Clearly, if we're receiving data from National Airport, and they're
90 degrees wrong, we would be notifying people 90 degrees in the wrong
direction that they would be at risk," said Ned Ingraham, acting
chief information officer for Washington, whose office is working with
NOAA.
To be sure, the work faces technical and cost barriers. DCNet's builders
have asked the Department of Homeland Security for $2 million to $10 million
to build out a system of 75 to 175 towers throughout the Washington-Baltimore
area and are awaiting a reply. The system is already producing data. Without
more money, however, detailed analysis and the improvement of existing
models will take years.
Government officials familiar with the project said that the Homeland
Security agency has been briefed about plume modeling and that the proposal
is one of many being considered for funding.
Federal and independent scientists and local emergency officials say further
research is vital. In the Department of Homeland Security's recently concluded
dirty-bomb response exercise in Seattle, planners assumed that it would
take authorities more than an hour to learn that 4,000 people lived or
worked in the most intensely radiated area.
"It's one thing to have the plume model, but you need to be able
to interpret it very quickly. What does that mean in terms of where the
greatest risk is, and which areas people ought to shelter in place?"
said Marianne Bichsel, a spokeswoman for Seattle Mayor Greg Nickels (D).
"Getting as accurate information as you can quickly is, of course,
vital."
During the 2002 Winter Olympics in Salt Lake City, the Pentagon tested
a separate detection and forecasting defense system. And next month, the
military's Defense Threat Reduction Agency and the Department of Energy
plan to deploy tracer gases and advanced weather radar in Oklahoma City,
in another short-term test of scenarios involving deadly particles sown
into the wind.
Such studies reflect growing concern among researchers that Cold War-era
studies they have relied on were premised on huge events -- such as a
nuclear blast scattering fallout over thousands of square miles -- or
flat battlefield terrain, such as the Army's Dugway Proving Ground in
the Utah desert. When it comes to tracing the release of a dirty bomb,
nerve gas or biohazard in the complex swirls and eddies of a U.S. city
streetscape, emergency responders face uncharted territory.
"In the Cold War, we plotted the course of ballistic missiles. In
the war against weapons of mass destruction, we need to be able to predict
the path of toxic clouds across new battlefields abroad and here at home,"
said Rep. Christopher Shays (R-Conn.), chairman of the House Government
Reform subcommittee on national security, emerging threats and international
relations.
Today, Shays's panel is to release a report by the National Academy of
Sciences' National Research Council that concludes that the federal government's
response to a "critical national security concern" requires
greater coordination and research. The council recommends that the government
fund a fully operational wind-tracking system in one American city, probably
Washington, where sensors are in place and the threat is perceived as
high.
The scientific group agreed with a study led last year by Samuel P. Williamson,
the Commerce Department's federal coordinator for meteorology, which concluded
that too many federal agencies offer too many models, designed for too
many purposes, with too little regard for how a mayor or governor could
use them in an emergency.
Eric J. Barron, dean of Pennsylvania State University's College of Earth
and Mineral Sciences and chairman of the National Research Council study,
said the government must assess the effectiveness and limits of forecasting
tools, then test them with the rescue agencies that first respond to emergencies.
The result could save lives, Barron said, and prove beneficial in other
fields, such as industrial accidents, air pollution studies, even snow
forecasting.
"Simple plume models are not sufficient for tracking dispersion in
a dense urban area," said Environmental Protection Agency scientist
Alan Huber, who was studying air pollution flows in lower Manhattan in
2001 when the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks redirected his research. "It
is important to do routine meteorological observations and modeling in
major cities . . . before an emergency event occurs."
May 19, 2003 - 7:36 p.m.
For U.S. Bases, the Pentagon Opens its Wallet for $1 billion on Chem-Bio
Defenses
By Caitlin Harrington, CQ Staff Writer
Brig. Gen. Stephen Reeves leans slightly forward in his leather chair
in a commercial office building in a cluttered strip of suburban Virginia.
His is a ready-to-go posture, as befits the Pentagon point man for purchasing
chemical and biological defense equipment for all the armed forces, including
those based at home.
A visitor can only imagine what goes through his mind.
"You can conjure up all kinds of threats, and people love to do that
- admire the problem," he says. "But if you're a terrorist,
what's easier to bring into the country?"
Here's one scenario he can imagine: a terrorist sets a bomb to go off
in a train car loaded with chlorine-filled cylinders. When the bomb explodes,
the chlorine mist creates a toxic chemical plume - and widespread panic.
Then what?
As the Homeland Security Department grapples with the potential consequences
of a chemical or biological terrorist attack, the Pentagon is of course
taking a closer look at terrorist threats to its bases. In at least one
attack scenario mapped out by experts in the 1990s, East Coast bases were
the first terrorist target, followed by an airborne biological attack
on U.S. Navy ships in Diego Garcia, in the Indian Ocean.
"Immediately after Sept. 11 we began looking at how we increase the
force protection posture across the Department of Defense," said
Reeves.
"While there were certainly immediate physical security measures
that needed to be taken, we also recognized we had significant potential
for chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear kinds of threats."
It was a realization that would spawn not only an entire manufacturing
industry of chemical and biological equipment, but a sweeping Defense-wide
plan to increase base security.
Next October, the Defense Department will launch Project Guardian, a $1
billion program to better protect 185 domestic military installations
from terrorist attacks involving weapons of mass destruction.
The project will span five years and eventually encompass more than 200
bases at home and abroad. A mix of 15 domestic and overseas military outposts
will be involved when the program gets underway.
Guardian officials will assess each base's vulnerability to weapons of
mass destruction, and then provide first responders with special equipment
and training.
The Pentagon has requested $76 million to initiate the program. That money
will pay for chemical and biological agent detectors, geographic information
systems that track drifting chemical clouds, filter systems, gas masks,
and pharmaceuticals.
An Army of Vendors
Finding equipment won't be a problem, Reeves said. The trick will be finding
the right equipment.
"Since 9/11, we have lots and lots of people who are interested in
selling us these things," he explained. "It's leveraged a lot
of industry research and development and we haven't had that in the past."
Industry's exploding interest in filling the Pentagon's chem-bio defense
requirements was evident at the Army's fourth annual Force Protection
Equipment Demonstration earlier this month at the Marine Corps Base in
Quantico, Va. Hundreds of vendors swarmed there to hawk night-vision equipment,
Kevlar® vests, chemical and biological agent detectors and a myriad
other devices, all promoted with a "homeland security" spin.
In April Pentagon officials held an advanced planning session for contractors
to discuss the kind of equipment they'll probably need for Project Guardian,
although no contracts will be awarded until the project gets off the ground.
Reeves said he will decide what equipment to buy based on standards being
written by a number of government departments and agencies.
The Pentagon may turn to the Department of Health and Human Services for
building protection standards, for example, but use guidelines from the
Food and Drug Administration for pharmaceutical and vaccine purchases,
he said.
The Guardian program also will have a personnel training element. Civilian
and military first responders - including firefighters, police officers,
and National Guard Weapons of Mass Destruction Civil Support Teams who
serve military bases - will go through a training program designed at
the Army Chemical School at Fort Leonard Wood, Mo.
As a result, Reeves said, they will all have the same level of expertise
in responding to a terrorist attack with chemical and biological weapons.
"Standards are absolutely critical," he said.
The first responders will be trained on equipment to detect and track
radiological or chemical agents.
They will be introduced to concepts of medical surveillance, picking out
early signs of disease outbreaks in unusual patterns of emergency room
visits or cough medicine purchases.
Tailored Response
On a day-to-day basis, Guardian will be run by Col. Camille Nichols, who
took the reins as project manager on May 5. Her task is daunting.
The military's penchant for developing "doctrines" and standards
is well-known. But each base has unique security needs and, therefore,
will have to find its own way to a state of preparedness, Reeves said.
A base near a chemical plant, for example, faces different threats than
a base near a commercial seaport. "You are really tailoring a solution
to each installation," he said.
In an effort to confront that problem, the Pentagon began running Guardian
pilot programs early last year at nine installations of varying sizes,
locations and security needs.
Amoeretta Hoeber, a consultant to the Defense Department on chemical and
biological issues, said Guardian is just one of several Pentagon programs
designed to address the threat of terrorism.
Five years ago, Hoeber warned in a paper that the Pentagon was woefully
unprepared for a terrorist attack on a military installation. Today she
is more optimistic.
"We're doing a lot of things to get better prepared," she said.
"It's hard to be fully prepared because terrorists have more ways
of attacking you than you have of defending.
"It's always a catchup game in that sort of sense," she added,
"but I think we're doing pretty well, actually."
Source: CQ Homeland Security
May 16, 2003
Bush orders agencies to use commercial spy satellite data
By Shane Harris
sharris@govexec.com
President Bush has ordered federal agencies to make greater use of private
sector high-resolution imaging satellites that take detailed pictures
of objects on the ground from hundreds of miles above earth. The move
will greatly commercialize the government's use of spy satellites, according
to administration and industry sources.
The White House on Tuesday announced a new national policy instructing
agencies to utilize "to the maximum practical extent" commercial
satellites. The images those satellites produce, which are fine enough
to depict an object just over 1 meter wide, are used primarily by intelligence
agencies and the Defense Department. Since the images are unclassified,
they can be shared without security clearance among U.S. allies for intelligence
analysis and battlefield planning, as they were in recent military operations
in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Intelligence agencies already rely heavily on the only two U.S. firms
that produce high-resolution images: Space Imaging of Denver, Colo., and
DigitalGlobe of Longmont, Colo. The presidential directive instructs the
agencies to use the firms even more so that they can focus more sophisticated
government-owned and operated satellites on higher-priority tasks.
"There is this tremendous hunger for high-resolution imagery, and
industry is now in a position to provide that," said Steven Aftergood,
an intelligence expert with the Federation of American Scientists in Washington.
Now that outsourcing of intelligence collection has become policy, agencies
will be expected to use their own satellites primarily for cases where
more precise identification of a target is necessary. In most cases, the
company-produced images meet agencies' needs, Aftergood said. Government-owned
satellites are believed to be able to spot objects ten times smaller than
what can be seen by satellites in orbit now, he added.
The high-resolution imaging industry was born in 1994, when President
Clinton issued a national policy granting companies licenses to build
and launch the satellites. The new directive presumably will go a long
way toward buttressing the two U.S. companies. It's also designed to ensure
the government doesn't rely on foreign firms. France, Russia, India and
Israel are among the major foreign providers of high-resolution imagery,
according to Mark Brender, an executive with Space Imaging.
A spokesman for the National Security Council said, "The policy
[contains] an important national security component to ensure that key
technological capabilities and services are protected under national security
interests."
An industry analyst said that the high-resolution industry hasn't grown
as much as some had hoped nearly a decade ago, despite the high demand
from government. The companies hope that the new policy will create more
business, said David Beachley of BRW LeGrand, a marketing firm in Denver
that works for Space Imaging.
Given the large appetite agencies already have for satellite imagery,
Aftergood questioned whether a presidential directive was necessary to
buoy the industry, especially since a third firm now is preparing to enter
the market. Growing applications for imagery include border and port security,
forest fire control, geological mapping and urban planning. In that sense,
"The directive ratifies a process that is already underway of acquiring
commercial imagery," Aftergood said.
Brought to you by GovExec.com
Port of Oakland awards contract for wireless security system
The Port of Oakland, California, announced on 7 May that it had awarded
a $4.75 million contract to Tyco Fire & Security unit ADT Security
Services for the installation of "an integrated security system using
advanced technology to assist the Port of Oakland, the nation's fourth
busiest container port, in its overall security assessment and improvement
program." The contract "calls for a comprehensive system design:
automated access control, video surveillance, perimeter intrusion detection,
as well as an integrated communications infrastructure." The design
"is 100 percent complete for two of the marine terminals and installation
is scheduled to begin immediately," a statement said. The system
"will provide operators of 10 port terminals with password-protected
systems to allow them to rapidly share video and data with local, state
and federal law enforcement agencies with jurisdiction over port facilities,"
including the Coast Guard, the Bureau of Customs and Border Protection
at the Homeland Security Department, the California Highway Patrol, Oakland
Police, and the Alameda County Sheriff's Department, the Contra Costa
Times reported.
ANALYSIS: The security system is being paid for using a $4.8 million
Transportation Security Administration grant from 2002. The ADT security
system, which relies heavily on encrypted wireless technology, cost less
to install than a comparable wired system. "A wireless network eliminated
the need for 31 miles of trenching and attendant interruptions of terminal
operations thus saving millions of dollars in labor and expense,"
a statement said. The Port of Oakland oversees "19 miles of waterfront...and
more than 900 acres of maritime terminal facilities."
US port security: Is X-ray enough?
Boston now scans two-thirds of the containers, making the port an exemplar
of antiterror tactics.
By Abraham McLaughlin, Staff writer of The Christian Science
Monitor
Down where the city of Boston meets the Atlantic Ocean, where a salty
wind swirls amid 30-foot-tall stacks of giant cargo containers, two customs
inspectors are doing something few of their colleagues nationwide are
able to do: They're scanning roughly 70 percent of the containers that
pass through the mid-sized port.
In the cramped control room of a massive mobile X-ray machine, Larry Campbell
and Joe Crowley electronically peer into steel boxes, hunting for terrorist
weapons among the frozen fish, shoes, shirts, and other cargo.
Every year, 16 million containers move through America's 361 ports. Only
4 percent get scanned - leaving what may be the biggest hole in the nation's
terror shield. In a sense, Boston's 70-percent scan rate makes it one
of the most secure US ports. It also highlights a fundamental question
now circling among port officials, political leaders, and the shipping
industry: Would scanning more containers - even up to 100 percent - boost
security?
The answer has big implications for the US homeland security effort, global
trade, and even retail prices, as scans can add time and money to the
shipping process. Yet, even as the debate grows, security experts warn
that scanning is only one component of effective seaport security.
"As part of a layered approach, scanners make sense, but the idea
that we will scan every container and therefore be confident that everything
is hunky-dory - that's pretty much removed from reality," says Stephen
Flynn, a former Coast Guard officer who's now a senior fellow at the Council
on Foreign Relations in New York. He and others say security requires
improvements in intelligence, cooperation with foreign ports, and tracking
of containers.
Inside Boston's $2.25 million machine, Messrs. Campbell and Crowley inspect
black-and-white images generated as their truck with its X-ray boom slowly
rolls past containers. Campbell's three decades of experience are evident
when, after just glancing at an image, he declares, "That's frozen
fish."
Campbell and Crowley have spent the past 30 years doing mostly low-tech
searches - crawling inside containers, randomly poking at contents. So
scanning an entire container in just seconds astounds them. "I could
retire any day I want," says Campbell, "but I'm staying put
because this technology is so amazing."
This X-ray machine is at once revolutionary and insufficient. Increasingly
being used at US ports, it was designed to find stolen cars and big drug
caches, not briefcase-sized dirty bombs.
Soon, however, the Boston truck will get a radiation sensor.
Yet such sensors are notoriously fickle. The port in Norfolk, Va., tried
mounting them on portport cranes - with the intent to scan every incoming
container. But harsh operating conditions and ever-changing levels of
background radiation rendered the devices virtually useless.
One increasingly popular tool is the $120,000 "portal system"
- two radiation-detecting panels that containers pass between.
With various technologies proliferating - and with ports seen as one of
the weakest security links - the idea of boosting the number of scans
is gaining political momentum. A plan by Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D) of New
York would require 100 percent scanning. "It's very ambitious, but
it's necessary," says Eric Schmeltzer, a Nadler spokesman. "Even
if you upped it to 50 percent, there's still a 50 percent chance a boat
has a bomb on it."
But others see a more complicated picture. A major upgrade in scanning
would detain legions of containers at ports, making them more vulnerable
to sabotage or tampering. It would also require thousands of new government
inspectors and billions of dollars in salary and equipment costs.
Ultimately, says Dr. Flynn, a more layered approach may be more effective
- and cheaper.
For example, the customs bureau's new Container Security Initiative, under
which lists of container contents are forwarded to US authorities 24 hours
before a shipment leaves a foreign port, gives officials time to assess
the risk. They can analyze the contents, the history of the container,
and the boat it's traveling on. High-risk cargo is then marked for special
scrutiny.
Another key element is securing containers. Most "seals" are
now quarter-inch-thick pieces of plastic and metal, and safer seals are
being developed.
There's also a growing effort to track shipments with global positioning
devices. If a container is diverted - perhaps by terrorists - it would
be flagged for inspection.
The global shipping industry can indeed benefit from boosting "supply-chain
visibility," Flynn argues. By spending $100 to $150 per container,
shippers can get real-time information about the location and security
of cargo.
Yet, until big systemic changes actually occur, even skeptics of ramping
up scanning admit it may be a necessary option.
Company to present portable explosion detection device
Wakefield, Massachusetts-based Implant Sciences Corporation, a developer
of products and surface treatment/coating technologies for medical devices
and semiconductor applications, announced on 5 May that the company had
"accepted an invitation to display its newly developed portable explosives
detection device at the Department of Defense's (DOD) Force Protection
Equipment Demonstration (FPED) Conference scheduled for May 6-8, 2003,
at the Quantico Marine Corps Base in Virginia." The company is developing
the portable detection device "under a 6 month contract with the
U.S. Navy Explosive Ordinance Disposal Technology Division" and believes
that it "meets all key specifications set by" the Navy, which
are: "can detect six major explosives from their scent alone, can
operate for four hours without a battery recharge, and weighs less than
fifteen pounds."
ANALYSIS: The device employs the company's "proprietary laser ion
mobility spectrometry technology which electronically detects minute quantities
of explosive vapor molecules in the air." Because it does not use
X-ray or cloth wipes, it is "safer and more efficient for travelers
and handlers. The portability of the device could allow for its use at
airports, public buildings, water reservoirs, stadiums, or anywhere security
checks are needed." Under a Cooperative Research and Development
Agreement with the Department of Transportation, Implant Sciences will
"exchange test data and provide units for independent evaluation
and fielding."
Researcher developing video technology for surveillance
Cameras being trained to ‘see’ people and recognize their activities
Contact: Amy Murray, (614) 292-8385
COLUMBUS - An Ohio State University professor is developing an advanced
video surveillance system that uses computers equipped with video cameras
to not only detect the presence of people, but also to identify their
activities.
The research has broad implications for national security as well as search
and rescue, border patrol, law enforcement, and many other types of military
applications.
James Davis, assistant professor of computer and information science,
is developing the system that combines a thermal camera with computer
learning methods, enabling the computer to perform the kind of visual
recognition that seems effortless for humans.
“We are building an intelligent video surveillance system that can reliably
detect the presence of people, track their movements, and recognize their
activities and ultimately their intent,” Davis said.
“We use thermal cameras to locate the people, and use statistical methods
to classify the activity of the person into different categories such
as walking, running, standing, and throwing. We are also interested in
more qualitative aspects of the action, like determining if the person
is a child or adult, moving leisurely or in a hurry, or carrying light
or heavy packages.”
The system uses a thermal camera to measure the amount of heat in a scene.
Thermal cameras are already widely used by law enforcement and military
agencies, especially to locate people in the dark.
“Thermal images provide a unique signature of humans so they stand out
as a bright white image against a dark background,” Davis said.
The camera also picks up residual heat. “If I place my hand on the wall
for a short time and then remove it, my handprint sits on the wall,” he
explains. “The thermal cameras are able to pick this up where standard
video cameras can’t see a thing.
“The computer looks for the white hot spots in the thermal video to locate
a potential person. Then it examines the shape and motion of the region
and matches it to a database of activity patterns.”
Davis trains the computer by giving it multiple examples of each activity.
The machine learns what key features are needed to identify people and
recognize their actions.
Davis has worked on human activity analysis with computers for the last
10 years. His research has received funding from the National Science
Foundation and the U.S. Army Night Vision Lab.
Davis expects to demonstrate the technology within the next two or three
years. “There are automatic systems on the market today that you can purchase,”
Davis said. “But we’re expecting these advanced systems to be more widely
deployed within the next five to 10 years.”
Davis’ work in investigating computer vision methods was recognized last
month by the National Science Foundation with the prestigious NSF Faculty
Early Career Development (CAREER) Program award. The awards, which are
highly competitive, are given only to the nation’s most outstanding junior
researchers. Davis will receive $500,000 over the next five years to continue
his research in this area.
Return to top
|
|
|
Focus Area Current News
Agri-Terrorism
Bio-Terrorism
Border Security
Business
and Economic Issues
Critical
Infrastructure Protection
Cyber-terrorism/Security
Domestic Counter-terrorism
Education and Training
Emergency
Preparedness and Response
Government & Political
Issues
Homeland
Security - General
Information
Sharing and Systems
Intelligence
and Warning
International
Issues
Legal Issues
Medical
Care Delivery
Public
Health
Science
and Technology
Sensors and Detection
Social
and Cultural Issues
Terrorism
- General
Transportation
Security
Weapons
of Mass Destruction
|
