TECHNOLOGY: Where We Are, Where We Have To Go, What We Must Do To Get There

BY MARY JANE DITTMAR

“To help technologies and systems that will enable Department of Homeland Security (DHS) operational components and first responders to deal with dangers to America’s safety and security” is the DHS’s highest priority according to the department’s March 2008 report, Science and Technology for a Safer Nation.¹

Recent developments in the homeland security research and technology arena, however, reveal that although there has been movement in a number of areas, at the present time, the DHS is not close to achieving this priority. It appears that it will take time. Sizeable challenges and limitations must be overcome. It is widely acknowledged that our nation is vulnerable to the risk of attacks in various areas. What is not yet well understood, however, is how and when our major efforts for preparedness in these areas will be completed.

This article is an overview of some of the major threats to first responders, the initiatives that have been put in place so far, the status of these programs, and the work still to be accomplished to achieve optimal preparedness.

CHEMICAL, BIOLOGICAL, RADIOLOGICAL, NUCLEAR, EXPLOSIVES (CBRNE)

 

Chemical (Industrial)

The DHS says that more than 7,000 high-risk chemical sites are targets for potential terrorist attacks in the United States. They include chemical plants, colleges and universities, hospitals, oil and natural gas production and storage sites, and food and agricultural processing and distribution centers. The DHS reviewed information submitted by 32,000 facilities before compiling the list, which was based on factors such as proximity to population centers, the volatility of the chemicals on-site, and how the chemicals are stored and handled. The DHS called the list the first step in its plan to reduce the consequences of an attack. It is trying to address the following threats posed by chemical facilities: the possibility of hazardous materials leaks, fires, and explosions; theft of materials that could be used elsewhere; and dangerous contamination of chemicals. DHS is relying on information provided by industry; it is not gathering the information independently. It contemplates performing field inspections at a later date.²

Biological

Biological weapons represent the potential for large-scale, multicasualty events. “Even a lone terrorist could cause a major disease outbreak in the population—and, in the case of communicable disease, the outbreak could spread in successive waves of infection.”³

Measures taken with regard to these threats include the following:

• Establishment of the first DHS National Biodefense Analysis and Countermeasures Center lab at the U.S. Army’s National Interagency Biodefense Campus at Fort Detrick, Maryland, which is expected to be completed in late 2008. Its primary mission will be to understand biological threats for the implementation of countermeasures and to support bioforensic analysis against bioterrorism to support law enforcement and veterinary communities. (1, 22)
• The Biodefense Knowledge Center, headquartered at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, supports collaboration and data sharing among policy makers, scientists and engineers, first responders, and other homeland security partners and stakeholders that require timely and authoritative biodefense information. (1, 22)
• The Center for Advancing Microbial Risk Assessment, led by Michigan State University in conjunction with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, fills critical gaps in risk assessments for decontaminating microbiological threats—such as plague and anthrax. Scientists from various universities measure exposure to biological agents in urban and natural environments and research response and control efforts, information on optimal doses, and subsequent responses for specific biological agents. (1, 24)
• Remote sensing technology by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration’s (NASA) Applied Sciences Program and 14 satellites now in orbit help specialists to predict the outbreak of some of the most common and deadly infectious diseases such as Ebola, West Nile virus, and Rift Valley Fever, according to research presented at the American Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene Meeting in Philadelphia in November 2007.⁴

The orbiting satellites collect data daily to monitor environmental changes. The information is shared with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the Department of Defense (DoD), and other agencies. The data are used to predict and track disease outbreaks and assist in making public health policy decisions. This technology also provides information about possible plague-carrying insects, rodents, and other vectors—globally and within the United States. The “Four Corners” region—Colorado, New Mexico, Arizona, and Utah—is highly susceptible for plague and Hanta virus outbreaks. Scientists can determine if an outbreak of plague is the result of natural circumstances or an act of terrorism. (4)

The capability of hospitals/trauma centers to accept victims of bioterrorism incidents that involve multiple casualties is another concern associated with large-scale disasters, manmade or natural. According to a survey of 34 level-1 trauma centers across the country conducted by the U.S. House of Representatives House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, U.S. hospitals and emergency rooms (ERs) would not be able to cope with the surge of casualties that might result from a terrorist attack. A recent CDC-funded study and a 2004 Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) study also identified serious problems in trauma care and hospital surge preparedness. Surge capacity is also critical for pandemic planning.⁵

None of the hospitals had enough ER capacity to deal with a sudden influx of victims; there were hardly any free intensive care beds available to treat the most seriously wounded casualties or enough regular inpatient beds to accommodate the less seriously injured victims. The situation in Washington, DC, and Los Angeles, CA, was found to be particularly “dire.”⁶

The House and the Senate have introduced legislation that addresses the nation’s trauma and emergency medical care system.

A task force of 37 experts, which assessed the current U.S. and Canadian capabilities for critical care during a disaster, including equipment and supplies, staff, and space, says it is likely that there will be shortages in many areas. A series of articles from the Critical Care Collaborative Initiatives from the January 2007 Mass Critical Care Summit was published in a May 2008 supplement issue of Chest. The initiatives pertain to many controversial ethical and resource topics related to critical care in a disaster scenario, such as critical care inclusion-exclusion and a recommendation for the expansion of intensive care units. The need for oxygen and ventilators in a major pandemic was also addressed, as were staff shortages in prolonged crises or where employees are personally affected by the disaster/pandemic, and training for critical care physicians.⁷

Radiological

In a June 2008 report, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) noted that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) and the DHS have to “take additional steps to better track and detect radioactive materials.”⁸ As in other areas of concern, steps have been taken to address these issues and the recommendations contained in a GAO 2003 report on the security of radioactive sources. The GAO had worked with 35 states. It gave them primary authority to regulate radioactive materials and sources to identify the sealed sources of greatest concern, to secure these radioactive sources, and to ensure that security requirements are implemented.

The NRC, on the other hand, has made only limited progress in improving the system for issuing licenses to ensure that parties with no legitimate need for radioactive materials can purchase them, for determining how to effectively mitigate the potential psychological effects of the malicious use of such materials, and for examining whether certain radioactive sources should be more stringently regulated. Although the NRC is developing a National Source Tracking System to replace the interim database it created to monitor the licensed sealed sources of materials that have the greatest potential for use in a dirty bomb, the system is not expected to be operational until January 2009, representing an 18-month delay in the GAO deadline set in 2003.

Nuclear

To assess agencies’ current capabilities and responsibilities in a nuclear attack, the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee sent letters to 15 agencies with responsibilities under the NRF to respond to a nuclear or radiological incident asking for information on their roles in a variety of areas, including evacuation, medical care, intelligence, forensics, and tracking fallout.⁹

Explosives

The Checkpoint Explosives Detection Program is developing a portable, stand-alone screening system for people and personal items at special events and mass-transit locations. It will continue testing integrated systems capable of detecting explosives—including gel-based and liquid materials and homemade explosives under the Magnetic Resonance Imaging Rapid Liquid Component Detector Project—and handguns to provide early warning of a suicide bomber attack. (1, 28)

The Standoff/Remote Detection Program was established to provide a stand-alone improvised explosive device (IED) detection capability against suicide bombers, vehicle-borne IEDs, or leave-behind bombs and to develop handheld systems and mobile screening stations that can be rapidly deployed and remotely operated in a layered security architecture. The major efforts are focused on baseline performance demonstrations of enhanced sampling techniques, such as nonintrusive spectroscopic and highly selective trace detection, magnetic and vibration anomaly imaging, or short-range standoff detection and mechanical property sensing. (1, 28)

Because of their widespread use and volatility, it is important to be able to detect nitroaromatics [examples are trinitrotoluene (TNT), tetryl, and picric acid]. A variety of detection approaches for these explosives are discussed in a University of California, San Diego, study, first published on the Web in April 2006.¹⁰

RESPONSE PLAN

The December 2003 Homeland Security Presidential Directive-8 (HSPD-8) called for a new national preparedness goal and performance measures, standards for preparedness assessments and strategies, as well as a system for assessing the nation’s overall preparedness. As of June, these goals still have not been completed. In 2004, the President introduced an annex to HSPD-8. Its intent was to establish a “standard and comprehensive approach to national planning and to ensure consistent planning across the federal government.” (9)

William O. Jenkins Jr., director of Homeland Security and Justice, reported the following relative to DHS’s progress in implementing the National Response Framework (NRF), the successor to the National Response Plan, which became effective in March 2008. It is a guide for determining the roles and responsibilities of the officials and agencies involved in the response efforts and the actions to be taken. (9)

• The DHS is still developing operational plans that will guide other federal agencies’ response efforts so that overall federal capabilities can be assessed. Two essential supplements to the NRF—response guides for federal partners and an integrated planning system—are also under development. Nor has there been an inventory of all federal response capabilities. The DHS will base its assessment of the nation’s overall preparedness on the Target Capabilities List, which accompanies the Guidelines.

• DHS/the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) is responsible “for leading and supporting the nation in a risk-based, comprehensive emergency management system of preparedness, protection, response, recovery, and mitigation.” FEMA is to develop and disseminate policies and procedures describing the conditions and time frames under which the next NRF revision will occur and how FEMA will conduct the revision process. These policies and procedures should clearly describe how FEMA will integrate all stakeholders, including non-federal stakeholders, into the revision process and the methods for communicating to these stakeholders.

• There have been “persistent shortfalls in achieving communications interoperability.” One of the reasons for this is the lack of a national framework that identifies technical standards for a communications system. States and localities, in partnership with the DHS, must develop statewide interoperable communications plans. First, however, a national baseline must be established to assess the current state of communications interoperability. DHS’s SAFECOM program, intended to strengthen interoperable public safety communications at all government levels, made only limited progress. It did not address interoperability with federal agencies, although this is a critical element for interoperable communications, as required by the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004. The DHS is developing a plan for SAFECOM that will focus on improving interoperability among all levels of government.

RESPONDER EQUIPMENT

The DHS has 179 “critical projects” underway in 2008, including autonomous chemical monitors, a BioWatch generation 3 detection system, Detect-to-Protect remote sensors, integrated CBRN(E) detections systems, and explosives detection and neutralization tools. (1)

“Although the DHS and [its] agencies have taken steps to improve homeland defense, local first responders still do not have tools to accurately identify right away what, when, where, and how much CBRN materials are released in U.S urban areas, accidentally or by terrorists,” asserts a June 2008 GAO report to Congress.¹¹

The report also noted the following:

• The equipment local first responders use to detect radiological and nuclear materials cannot predict the dispersion of these materials in the atmosphere. One possible reason for this is that no one agency has been assigned the mission to develop, certify, and test equipment first responders can use for detecting radiological materials in the atmosphere.
• Chemical detectors are marginally able to detect an immediately dangerous concentration of chemical warfare agents, and handheld detection devices for biological agents are not reliable or effective.
• The DHS adopted a few standards for CBRN detection equipment, but it has no independent testing to validate whether it can detect CBRN agents at the sensitivities manufacturers claim it can. Nor does DHS’s testing certification cover equipment it does not develop, including equipment first responders buy.
• Interagency studies have shown that federal agencies’ models to track the atmospheric release of CBRN materials are severely limited in urban areas.
• First responders participating in DHS’s national TOPOFF exercises have been confused by the contradictory results yielded by competing plume models. The Interagency Modeling and Atmospheric Assessment Center (IMAAC), created to coordinate modeling predictions, lacks procedures to resolve contradictory findings. Scientific research is lacking on how low-level exposure to CBRN materials affect civilian populations, especially elderly persons, children, and people whose immune systems are compromised.

The GAO recommends that the Secretary of Homeland Security do the following:

• Reach agreement with agencies concerning which will have the mission and responsibility to develop, certify, and independently test first responders’ equipment for detecting hazardous materials releases.
• Test and validate manufacturers’ claims concerning their CBRN detection equipment’s sensitivity and specificity.
• Refine IMAAC’s procedures for addressing contradictory modeling predictions in CBRN events.
• With IMAAC, work with the federal plume modeling community to accelerate research and development on model deficiencies in urban areas and improve federal modeling and assessment capabilities. The full report can be viewed at www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/grtnpt? GAO 08-180.

See “Cutting-Edge Technologies” for a partial list of products recently made available or under development and testing.

Responder Personal Protective Equipment and Safety

In Fiscal Year 2008, the Personal Protective Equipment Project is developing materials that can provide CBRNE protection to first responders. Important protective properties include self-decontamination for chemical and/or biological agents, increased service life, self-repair if the gear is compromised (e.g., ripped), and flame resistance.

Also, through special studies, system requirements and designs for a first responder three-dimensional location system have been developed. The system will be able to track personnel. Research has also resulted in prototype hardware and software for a system to monitor structural integrity before entering the structure.

The Preparedness and Response Advanced Concepts, Technologies and Systems Program is developing advanced technologies, tools, and equipment to support rapid and effective all-hazards emergency response and recovery. It addresses also advanced technologies to improve first responders’ ability to instantly track, locate, and identify responders in challenged areas (e.g., subterranean facilities, skyscrapers, and warehouses). (1, 39)

SCHOOLS

Schools have been singled out as primary targets of domestic terrorists in the state of Nevada; mega-casinos come next, according to Nevada Homeland Security Commissioner Dr. Dale Carrison. He added, however, that the state must be prepared for foreign terrorism as well.”¹²

An attack on a school in Chesterfield, South Carolina, was prevented in April, according to a Reuters report. A student was planning to detonate explosives in a suicide attack on his high school. Investigators had discovered a timeline for an attack in the student’s journal, which indicated how he would lock the school’s doors and where he would place more than five explosives in the building.¹³

Many of the nation’s public schools do not have equipment and expertise for a full-scale terrorist attack, natural disaster, or biohazard emergency, a GAO survey has shown. Many schools have never trained with local emergency response teams, and some school officials will not be able to use their handheld radios to communicate with first responders in an emergency, the 50-state GAO study revealed.¹⁴ These findings were part of the testimony before the U.S. House Homeland Security Committee. Chairman Rep. Bennie Thompson said that the committee will “tighten” the present requirement, which mandates that a school district have a plan in place but does not require that the federal government review the schools’ plans—only that it verifies that a plan was filed with the state. Colleges and universities are not required to have emergency plans. (14)

The Southeastern Pennsylvania Regional Counterterrorism Task Force has improved its preparedness for incidents involving school violence by updating the Advanced Disaster Management simulator (ADMS-COMMAND) it purchased in 2006. The simulator can be used to train personnel in special weapons and tactics (SWAT) as well as first responder teams for transportation-related accidents, hazmat releases; and chemical, biological, radioactive, nuclear, and explosive situations.¹⁵

•••

Only time will tell whether the nation’s overall response plan will be completely operational and tested in time for the next major incident. In the meantime, there are signs that the risks are not abating.

For example, Australian Intelligence reported in May that the country remains under threat from imported and homegrown terrorism. “The global violent jihadist movement and the terrorist activity it inspires and embraces continues to be a significant threat to Australia, our people and our interests,” the official said.¹⁶

In Sweden, a man entered a nuclear plant carrying highly explosive material, according to a Reuters report. Plant personnel told the police that the man, who was a welder and was going to perform a job there, was stopped in a random security check and was found to be carrying small amounts of the highly explosive material TATP, triacetone triperoxide, an extremely unstable explosive especially when subjected to heat, friction, and shock. Suicide bombers in Israel had used it.¹⁷

The U.S. Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, in its report, Violent Islamist Extremism, the Internet, and the Homegrown Terrorist Threat (May 8, 2008), has raised concerns about “home-grown terrorists.” The report attributes the development of homegrown terrorists primarily to “radicalization in U.S. prisons, whereby American citizens can adopt a variant of violent Islamist ideology,” and to the Internet, which provides the most accessible source of information in the forms of “Web pages, chat rooms, and discussion forums that can connect interested individuals with extremists around the world.”

Although the government has been charged with securing our nation’s safety, it would seem that local responders must also be ever-vigilant in identifying potential terrorist targets in their jurisdictions, both obvious and not as obvious, and also research and test the equipment they purchase or acquire from other government agencies to ensure that it will be efficient and safe for their purposes. They should preplan, with all the other agencies that might respond, for potential mass gatherings to which they may respond in their jurisdictions. In addition, they must become vociferous advocates for their needs. They should work with their local and state agencies, other departments in their regions, fire service associations, and their legislators. They must let their needs be known and check often enough to see that there are ongoing, concerted efforts by all responsible to deliver what is needed in a reasonable time.

References

1. Science and Technology for a Safer Nation, Department of Homeland Security, March 2008.

2. “DHS tags 7,000 sites ‘high risk,’ “ Mike M. Ahlers, CNN, http://cnnwire.blogs.cnn.com/2008/06/20/…

3. http://healthlink.mcw.edu/article/1002853050.html/. Accessed 5/9/2008.

4. American Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene, press release, undated.

5. “HHS grants still shortchange emergency medical preparedness,” Anthony L. Kimery, “This isn’t about trauma centers,” June 10, 2008.

6. http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/, May 16, 2008.

7. American College of Chest Physicians press release, May 5, 2008; http://www.cidrap.umn.edu/.Accessed May 14, 2008.

8. GAO report to the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, U.S. Senate. “Nuclear Security: NRC and DHS Need To Take Additional Steps to Better Track and Detect Radioactive Materials,” GAO Highlights, June 2008.

9. GAO Testimony Before the Subcommittee on Management, Investigations, and Oversight, Committee on Homeland Security, U.S. House of Representatives. “Emergency Management: Observations on DHS’s Preparedness for Catastrophic Disasters.” Statement of William O. Jenkins Jr., director Homeland Security and Justice. June 11, 2008.

10. Toal, Sarah J. and William C. Trogler, “Polymer sensors for nitroaromatic explosives detection,” University of California, San Diego, Journal of Materials Chemistry; Web: April 27, 2006. Accessed July 7, 2008. contact: [email protected]/.

11. GAO report to Congressional Requesters. Homeland Security: “First Responders’ Ability to Detect and Model Hazardous Releases in Urban Areas Is Significantly Limited.” June 2008.

12. http://www.lasvegasnow.com/, June 12, 2008,

13. “SC High School Student Charged with Attempting to Use WMD,” AP, http://hstoday.us/. April 24, 2008.

14. Greg Toppo, USA Today, http://usatoday. Accessed 7/11/2008.

15. www.admstraining.com/pressrel/PR121207.php. December,12, 2007.

16. http://hstoday.us/. May 28, 2008.

17. Reuters, http://hstoday.us/. May 22, 2008.

Responder resources

Among resources responders may find helpful are the following:

www.firstresponder.gov: “one-stop shopping” for advanced technology information to support federal, state, and local public safety and emergency-responder communities.

www.dhs.gov: S&T Technology Clearinghouse provides information on products and services to assist first responders in making informed procurement decisions based on performance tests and evaluations to accelerate the development of technical and operational standards and to provide best-practice forums to share information on training, tactics, techniques, and procedures.

www.firstresponder.gov: .TechSolutions is a Web-based method first responders can use to submit directly to DHS S&T their concerns about high-priority capability gaps and generate opportunities for rapid prototyping to help them in their jobs.

http://www.wmdfr.com/: an arrangement of various agency links to facilitate access and review for first responders.

http://www.bt.cdc.gov/bioterrorism/responders.asp/: bioterrorism information for first responders.

http://www.bt.cdc.gov/planning/: resources for preparing and planning for bioterrorism emergency. and resources for preparedness for specific types of emergencies

http://www.osha.gov/SLTC/bioterrorism/solutions.html/: references that provide ways to prepare for responding to a bioterrorist attack, including state and federal disease surveillance and epidemiology, stockpiling vaccine for emergency use, mass vaccination of first responders, and training for medical personnel.

“1918 Influenza Pandemic: Lessons for Homeland Security,” Patrick S. Mahoney, Fire Engineering, July 2008.

Commercial Equipment Direct Assistance Program (CEDAP): an important component of the Department of Homeland Security’s preparedness efforts. The program aids smaller jurisdictions and eligible urban areas by directly transferring specialized commercial equipment, equipment training, and equipment technical assistance to enhance regional response capabilities. FY 2008 funding valued at $16 million.

Committee on Homeland Security Majority Staff Report Examining Public Health, Safety, and Security for Mass Gatherings, U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Homeland Security, May 2008. A PDF of the report is at hsc-democrats.house.gov/SiteDocuments/20080513105623-98169.pdf/.

Detecting Explosives

Spray-on films developed by University of California, San Diego (UCSD), chemists are the technology behind the portable trace explosives detection system, the XPAK, developed by RedXDefense. This device can quickly and reliably reveal trace amounts of high explosives. Under ultraviolet light, explosives-contaminated fingerprints appear as dark spots on a bright blue background. Additional inks being developed at UCSD by chemistry and biochemistry professor William Trogler and graduate student Jason Sanchez can distinguish among different classes of explosives.

(1) Actual detection of TNT as viewed in the XPAK. (Photo courtesy of RedXDefense.)

A single layer of the polymer, about one thousandth of a gram on a surface a half-foot in diameter, can detect minute amounts of some explosives, as little as a few trillionths of a gram (picograms). Films also adhere directly to potentially contaminated surfaces. Detection can be completed within 30 seconds. Exposure to ultraviolet light also alters one particular film so that traces of nitrate esters, a class of chemicals that includes the highly explosive PETN, begin to glow green. Traces of other classes of explosives, such as nitroaromatics like TNT, stay dark. The XPAK, by design, can readily incorporate new detection inks as they become available. “Traces of Explosives Revealed by Glowing Films Developed by UC San Diego Chemists,” www.medicalnewstoday.com/printerfriendlynews.php?newsid=108732. May 26, 2008.

(2) Trace explosive particles left on a surface by contact from a hand contaminated with TNT. Trace TNT appears as dark areas in a glowing blue background when visualized under UV illumination after application of a thin film of a blue-emitting polymer to the surface. The thin film is invisible under room light. (Photo by Jason Sanchez, UCSD.)

null

Cutting-Edge Technologies

● ALTAIR® 4 multigas detector. Motion Alert identifies threats in 15 minutes or less. DHS “Detect to Protect” Project. System can be expanded to cover up to 50 threats. MSA.

● AreaRAE® Toxic Gas and Radiation Sensor Network, PlumeRAE® and MultiRAE Plus Five-Gas Detector. Steel monitors with radiation and toxic gas detection capability. PlumeRAE measured and tracked toxic clouds. Deployed at the Guam and Oregon TOPOFF 4 terrorism preparedness exercise, October 15-19, 2007. RAE Systems, Inc.

● BAM 1020 beta attenuation mass PM-2.5 particulate monitor. Reliable, accurate, continuous, hourly results in real time. Elevated PM-2.5 events can be determined as they occur (instead of weeks later). Awarded USEPA equivalency designation Class III EQPM-0308-170. Met One Instruments.

● BSM-2000 autonomous monitoring of air for the presence of airborne bacterial spores such as anthrax. Universal Detection Technology (UDTT). Invited for discussions with the Department of Homeland Security’s Science and Technology (S&T) Directorate. UDTT owns the license to the technology used in BMS-2000, which is a patented technology developed at NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory.

● Detection system monitors air for virtually all of the major threat agents terrorists might use. Tested in the laboratory and field by Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL). Latest tests have shown almost simultaneously detection of four potential threat materials—biological, chemical, explosives, and radiological, as well as illicit drugs. Uses Single-Particle Aerosol Mass Spectrometry (SPAMS). Described in the June 15 edition of Analytical Chemistry, a semi-monthly journal published by the American Chemical Society. LLNL would like to make the SPAMS machine smaller and less expensive and conduct more field tests. Funding for research has been provided by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency and the Technical Support Working Group, both within the U.S. Department of Defense, as well as the U.S. DHS. http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/printerfriendlynews.php?newsid=111100, June 15, 2008.

● DuoDote™ auto-injector. Single, dual-chambered auto-injector contains two separate chemical nerve agent antidotes, atropine and pralidoxime chloride. Meridian.

● Fast-acting antidote to cyanide poisoning. Developed by University of Minnesota Center for Drug Design and Minneapolis VA Medical Center researchers. Antidote works in less than three minutes. Research published in the December 27, 2007, issue of Journal of Medicinal Chemistry. Tested on animals. Human clinical trials expected to begin during the next three years. A National Institutes of Health five-year grant is funding the study. http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/92746.php/, Dec 28, 2007.

● Fido XT™; PR: handheld ultra-sensitive explosives sensor for military application. Said to have sensitivity levels comparable to specially trained canines. ICx Technologies™.

● GE StreetLab® mobile portable handheld device. Detects chemical and biological agents—liquids, powders, or solids—in one step. Extended-range wireless technology can deliver quick and accurate results from the hot zone. The U.S. Department of State is field-testing GE Mobile Trace, a handheld trace detection instrument that can simultaneously detect explosives and narcotics in seconds and increase the range of explosives detectable from a single sample. Developed under contract to the Unites States Technical Support Working Group, a national forum that identifies, prioritizes, and coordinates research and development requirements for combating terrorism with funding support from the Joint IED Defeat Organization. GE Homeland Protection, Inc.

● Geospatial tool. U.S. Geological Survey updated and expanded the Global Wildlife Disease Map Version 2, developed jointly by the USGS and the University of Wisconsin-Madison. Monitors wildlife diseases. The map is updated daily and shows pushpins that mark news stories of wildlife diseases. The Web tool taps into the organization’s electronic library and searches for all available information related to various diseases and medical conditions. Information provided in several formats. Newest version (March) tracks West Nile virus, avian influenza, chronic wasting disease, and monkey pox.

● Guardian® explosives trace portal. Enhances suicide bomber threat detection technology for airport security. Won DHS Science and Technology Office award. Syagen Technology Inc.

● HazMasterG3® Wireless decision-support system. Provides details on more than 118,000 chemical, biological, and radiological agents; trade names; and explosives. Includes advanced tools for bomb technicians and Tier 2 preplan support for more than 60,000 facilities nationwide for fire, hazmat, and USAR needs. Also offers modeling for precursor outcomes, chemical reactions, and advanced agent-identification capabilities for a broad range of unknown threats. Instantly identifies whether an agent is a precursor for chemical warfare, explosives, heroin, cocaine, or methamphetamine production. Certified by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security as an approved product for Homeland Security; designated as a “Qualified Anti-Terrorism Technology. Alltel Wireless-Alluviam LLC.

● JMAR SP-LIBS laser-induced breakdown spectroscope. Portable double-pulse laser device for remote hazmat detection and analysis.

● Mobile nuclear and radiological materials detection system. Fits in the back of a sport utility vehicle. Laptop screen mounted on the vehicle’s console or on a handheld PDA shows results: natural, medical, industrial, or “threat.” Alarm sounds and lights flash in the SUV, and computer screens shows where the threat is coming from if the material is considered a “threat.” U.S. Domestic Nuclear Detection Office will test prototype this year. Raytheon demonstrated the device on April 15, 2008, at the Command Readiness Center shared by the Rhode Island National Guard and the state Emergency Management Agency. Raytheon Co.

● RADView™ PD Radiation Dosimeter badge airborne anthrax spore monitor. Lightweight credit card-size radiation dosimeter with self-developing radiochromic film for visual measurement of absorbed radiation dose.

MARY JANE DITTMAR is senior associate editor of Fire Engineering and conference manager of FDIC. Before joining the magazine in 1991, she served as editor of a trade magazine in the health/nutrition market and held various positions in the educational and medical advertising fields. She has a bachelor’s degree in English/journalism and a master’s degree in communication arts.