Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
4CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 OBJECTIVE The objective of the research reported here was to demon- strate the capabilities of existing portable explosive detection devices (EDDs) in a transit environment, including subways and bus station platforms. The study addresses this objective combining three areas of expertise: (1) an in-depth understand- ing of transit operations and how EDDs can be used effectively without interfering with efficient operations, (2) scientific and technical expertise in the deployment and operation of portable EDDs, and (3) knowledge and experience in conducting field- operational tests to assess the efficacy of available portable EDDs in transit settings. Research conducted for this study and reported here includes the following: ⢠The selected portable EDDs were tested in the transit environment, and the use of these devices to check sus- picious packages was evaluated. A variety of transit and geographical environments were used in these tests. ⢠The intended use of these devices is to perform prelim- inary field tests to detect explosive materials. The ease of use was considered important because the intended operators are transit security personnel, not explosive ordnance disposal (EOD) units. ⢠The ability to screen vehicles at entrances to bus tunnels was evaluated. In addition, this report makes recommendations for improve- ment or adaptation of the devices to the transit environment, discusses the cost of implementing and maintaining the instru- ments, and includes a comparison of portable detectors and canines. 1.2 AUDIENCE This report is directed toward a range of audiences within the transit community with a collective interest in transporta- tion security. General managers, middle- to upper-level man- agers, transit-security and/or law-enforcement officials, local or state law-enforcement representatives, all with a vested interest in the security of their respective transit networks, are the target audience for this report. 1.3 SCOPE The project scope included the following: ⢠Establishing technical and operational objectives for explosive detection devices, ⢠Selecting demonstration sites and establishing demon- stration protocols, ⢠Operating the equipment in the transit environment and documenting the test results, ⢠Recommending portable EDDs for application in the transit environment, and ⢠Estimating implementation and maintenance costs for portable EDDs. 1.4 METHODOLOGY The method for the field demonstration was semi- quantitative, reproducible, and tested the full cycle of detec- tion capabilities from sample collection to identification. The strategy was based on methods used by the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) Howard Center (formerly the Federal Aviation Administration [FAA] Technical Center), but was adapted to the study needs. The research in this report involved the following general methodology: ⢠A literature search of the information available on portable explosive detection systems was conducted. The search included commercial detection technologies as applied by the government and private industries. ⢠Two leading explosive detection manufacturers were identified, and the test team attempted to borrow two portable EDDs from each company. Only one manufac- turer loaned the test team the two portable EDDs. These units were the subject of the study. ⢠The test team completed training from the manufacturer and developed the demonstration protocol. ⢠A plan was developed for the onsite demonstration of the devices. ⢠The test team selected three transit agencies as test sites on the basis of a range of variables including location,
51.5 ASSUMPTIONS The demonstration results are based upon the performance of two portable EDDs on loan from a manufacturer. The con- clusions of this study are based on three case studies. On the basis of a range of variables, the demonstration team selected three transit agencies across the United States as test sites. The team conducted onsite field testing of the portable EDDs in the selected transit environments, evaluating the use of these devices to check suspicious packages. The alarm levels of the instrumentation tested were found to be 10 nanograms (ng) for high explosives and about 70 ng for ammonium nitrate (AN) and were consistent with the manufacturerâs specification. During this study, tests were conducted using sample quantities of explosives that were at, or even below, the manufacturerâs specified alarm level. types of transit systems in the agency, age of the facility, and temperature and humidity conditions. The team con- ducted onsite field testing of the portable EDDs in the selected transit environments, evaluating the use of these devices to check suspicious packages. ⢠The test team interviewed security chiefs, field person- nel, and/or contracted law enforcement at each transit agency to gain insight on the realities of deploying a portable EDD. ⢠The test team analyzed the data gathered through the onsite visits to develop a report on the findings and rec- ommendations for improvement of the devices or their adaptation to the transit environment. The test team also estimated the costs for implementing and maintaining the devices including training and calibration require- ments for effective operation
