<pre>
Terrorism and Drug Trafficking: Testing Status and Views on Operational
Viability of Pulsed Fast Neutron Analysis Technology (Letter Report,
04/13/99, GAO/GGD-99-54).
Pursuant to a legislative requirement, GAO provided information on the
operational viability of pulsed fast neutron analysis technology (PFNA),
which is designed to directly and automatically detect and measure the
presence of specific materials by exposing their constituent chemical
elements to short bursts of subatomic particles called neutrons,
focusing on: (1) the status of plans for field testing a PFNA inspection
system for counterterrorism and counterdrug purposes; and (2) federal
agency and vendor views on the operational viability of such a system.
GAO noted that: (1) the Customs Service, the Department of Defense
(DOD), the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), and the Ancore
Corporation recently began planning to field test PFNA; (2) because they
are in the early stage of planning, they do not expect the actual field
test to begin until mid to late 1999 at the earliest; (3) generally,
agency and vendor officials estimate that a field test covering Customs'
and DOD's requirements will cost at least $5 million and that the cost
could reach $8 million if FAA's requirements are included in the joint
test; (4) Customs officials told GAO they are working closely with
applicable congressional committees and subcommittees to decide whether
Customs can help fund the field test, given that Senate Report 105-251
directs the Commissioner of Customs to enter into negotiations with the
private sector to conduct a field test of PFNA technology at no cost to
the federal government; (5) generally, a complete field test would
include: (a) preparing a test site and constructing an appropriate
facility; (b) making any needed modifications to the only existing PFNA
system and its components; (c) disassembling, shipping and reassembling
the system at the test site; and (d) conducting an operational test for
about 4 months; (6) according to agency and Ancore officials, test site
candidates are two seaports in California (Long Beach and Oakland) and
two land ports in El Paso, Texas; (7) federal agency and vendor views on
the operational viability of PFNA vary; (8) while Customs, DOD, and FAA
officials acknowledge that laboratory testing has proven the technical
feasibility of PFNA, they told GAO that the current Ancore inspection
system would not meet their operational requirements; (9) among other
concerns, Customs, DOD, and FAA officials said that a PFNA system not
only is too expensive (about $10 million to acquire per system) but also
is too large for operational use in most ports of entry or other sites;
(10) accordingly, these agencies question the value of further testing;
(11) Ancore disputes these arguments, believes it can produce an
operationally cost-effective system, and is proposing that a PFNA system
be tested at a port of entry; and (12) the Office of National Drug
Control Policy has characterized neutron interrogation as an emerging or
future technology that has shown promise in laboratory testing, and,
thus, warrants field testing to provide a more informed basis for
deciding if PFNA has operational merit.
--------------------------- Indexing Terms -----------------------------
REPORTNUM: GGD-99-54
TITLE: Terrorism and Drug Trafficking: Testing Status and Views on
Operational Viability of Pulsed Fast Neutron
Analysis Technology
DATE: 04/13/99
SUBJECT: Terrorism
Narcotics
Operational testing
Drug trafficking
Search and seizure
Federal procurement
Research and development
Customs administration
Law enforcement
IDENTIFIER: Pulsed Fast Neutron Analysis Inspection System
Customs Service Five-Year Technology Acquisition Plan
</pre>
Terrorism and Drug Trafficking: Testing Status and Views on Operational
Viability of Pulsed Fast Neutron Analysis Technology (Letter Report,
04/13/99, GAO/GGD-99-54).
Pursuant to a legislative requirement, GAO provided information on the
operational viability of pulsed fast neutron analysis technology (PFNA),
which is designed to directly and automatically detect and measure the
presence of specific materials by exposing their constituent chemical
elements to short bursts of subatomic particles called neutrons,
focusing on: (1) the status of plans for field testing a PFNA inspection
system for counterterrorism and counterdrug purposes; and (2) federal
agency and vendor views on the operational viability of such a system.
GAO noted that: (1) the Customs Service, the Department of Defense
(DOD), the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), and the Ancore
Corporation recently began planning to field test PFNA; (2) because they
are in the early stage of planning, they do not expect the actual field
test to begin until mid to late 1999 at the earliest; (3) generally,
agency and vendor officials estimate that a field test covering Customs'
and DOD's requirements will cost at least $5 million and that the cost
could reach $8 million if FAA's requirements are included in the joint
test; (4) Customs officials told GAO they are working closely with
applicable congressional committees and subcommittees to decide whether
Customs can help fund the field test, given that Senate Report 105-251
directs the Commissioner of Customs to enter into negotiations with the
private sector to conduct a field test of PFNA technology at no cost to
the federal government; (5) generally, a complete field test would
include: (a) preparing a test site and constructing an appropriate
facility; (b) making any needed modifications to the only existing PFNA
system and its components; (c) disassembling, shipping and reassembling
the system at the test site; and (d) conducting an operational test for
about 4 months; (6) according to agency and Ancore officials, test site
candidates are two seaports in California (Long Beach and Oakland) and
two land ports in El Paso, Texas; (7) federal agency and vendor views on
the operational viability of PFNA vary; (8) while Customs, DOD, and FAA
officials acknowledge that laboratory testing has proven the technical
feasibility of PFNA, they told GAO that the current Ancore inspection
system would not meet their operational requirements; (9) among other
concerns, Customs, DOD, and FAA officials said that a PFNA system not
only is too expensive (about $10 million to acquire per system) but also
is too large for operational use in most ports of entry or other sites;
(10) accordingly, these agencies question the value of further testing;
(11) Ancore disputes these arguments, believes it can produce an
operationally cost-effective system, and is proposing that a PFNA system
be tested at a port of entry; and (12) the Office of National Drug
Control Policy has characterized neutron interrogation as an emerging or
future technology that has shown promise in laboratory testing, and,
thus, warrants field testing to provide a more informed basis for
deciding if PFNA has operational merit.
--------------------------- Indexing Terms -----------------------------
REPORTNUM: GGD-99-54
TITLE: Terrorism and Drug Trafficking: Testing Status and Views on
Operational Viability of Pulsed Fast Neutron
Analysis Technology
DATE: 04/13/99
SUBJECT: Terrorism
Narcotics
Operational testing
Drug trafficking
Search and seizure
Federal procurement
Research and development
Customs administration
Law enforcement
IDENTIFIER: Pulsed Fast Neutron Analysis Inspection System
Customs Service Five-Year Technology Acquisition Plan
</pre>
Terrorism and Drug Trafficking: Testing Status and Views on Operational
Viability of Pulsed Fast Neutron Analysis Technology (Letter Report,
04/13/99, GAO/GGD-99-54).
Pursuant to a legislative requirement, GAO provided information on the
operational viability of pulsed fast neutron analysis technology (PFNA),
which is designed to directly and automatically detect and measure the
presence of specific materials by exposing their constituent chemical
elements to short bursts of subatomic particles called neutrons,
focusing on: (1) the status of plans for field testing a PFNA inspection
system for counterterrorism and counterdrug purposes; and (2) federal
agency and vendor views on the operational viability of such a system.
GAO noted that: (1) the Customs Service, the Department of Defense
(DOD), the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), and the Ancore
Corporation recently began planning to field test PFNA; (2) because they
are in the early stage of planning, they do not expect the actual field
test to begin until mid to late 1999 at the earliest; (3) generally,
agency and vendor officials estimate that a field test covering Customs'
and DOD's requirements will cost at least $5 million and that the cost
could reach $8 million if FAA's requirements are included in the joint
test; (4) Customs officials told GAO they are working closely with
applicable congressional committees and subcommittees to decide whether
Customs can help fund the field test, given that Senate Report 105-251
directs the Commissioner of Customs to enter into negotiations with the
private sector to conduct a field test of PFNA technology at no cost to
the federal government; (5) generally, a complete field test would
include: (a) preparing a test site and constructing an appropriate
facility; (b) making any needed modifications to the only existing PFNA
system and its components; (c) disassembling, shipping and reassembling
the system at the test site; and (d) conducting an operational test for
about 4 months; (6) according to agency and Ancore officials, test site
candidates are two seaports in California (Long Beach and Oakland) and
two land ports in El Paso, Texas; (7) federal agency and vendor views on
the operational viability of PFNA vary; (8) while Customs, DOD, and FAA
officials acknowledge that laboratory testing has proven the technical
feasibility of PFNA, they told GAO that the current Ancore inspection
system would not meet their operational requirements; (9) among other
concerns, Customs, DOD, and FAA officials said that a PFNA system not
only is too expensive (about $10 million to acquire per system) but also
is too large for operational use in most ports of entry or other sites;
(10) accordingly, these agencies question the value of further testing;
(11) Ancore disputes these arguments, believes it can produce an
operationally cost-effective system, and is proposing that a PFNA system
be tested at a port of entry; and (12) the Office of National Drug
Control Policy has characterized neutron interrogation as an emerging or
future technology that has shown promise in laboratory testing, and,
thus, warrants field testing to provide a more informed basis for
deciding if PFNA has operational merit.
--------------------------- Indexing Terms -----------------------------
REPORTNUM: GGD-99-54
TITLE: Terrorism and Drug Trafficking: Testing Status and Views on
Operational Viability of Pulsed Fast Neutron
Analysis Technology
DATE: 04/13/99
SUBJECT: Terrorism
Narcotics
Operational testing
Drug trafficking
Search and seizure
Federal procurement
Research and development
Customs administration
Law enforcement
IDENTIFIER: Pulsed Fast Neutron Analysis Inspection System
Customs Service Five-Year Technology Acquisition Plan