GovernmentExecutive.com

The Homeland Security Department within the "next few weeks" plans to solicit companies for technology designed to detect suicide bombers near railways, buildings and other critical infrastructure, a top official said Monday.

"I'd be very surprised if that's not an area that we won't experience," Charles McQueary, the undersecretary for Homeland Security's science and technology division, said at the Brookings Institution. He said the department does not have any intelligence information that suggests terrorists are planning such an attack but added, "It's an easy thing to do."

McQueary said the department seeks devices capable of detecting explosives on an individual 100 yards away. "It's not an easy problem to solve," he said. "I'm confident we can make scientific progress in the area."

McQueary told reporters after the meeting that his office has yet to determine the price tag for the potential contract.

But the House Appropriations Committee concurred with the idea, proposing $9.7 million in the fiscal 2005 homeland security spending bill -- the same amount requested by the department -- for such an initiative. McQueary's shop is required to develop and acquire technologies that would prevent an explosive attack on buildings, critical infrastructure and the civilian population.

"The committee is aware of the evaluation of the commercial, off-the-shelf devices under review and the development of new devices to interdict would-be bombers currently underway," the committee's report on the legislation said.

The House is slated to vote on the $32 billion spending bill this week. The Senate Homeland Security Appropriations Subcommittee may debate its version of the bill, too.

The panel also called for a "comprehensive strategy" by Feb. 1 for the program and its coordination efforts with other agencies.

The issue has become a higher priority for Congress following the suicide-bomber attack on a Madrid, Spain, train station in March. The spending bill also included $111 million for rail security through the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) and state grants to high-risk urban areas.

Meanwhile, McQueary said Monday the department plans to finish integrating the various research and development agencies that were transferred to the department upon its creation last year. He said the science and technology division would either have oversight responsibilities or direct responsibilities for the remaining R&D offices at the Coast Guard, Secret Service and TSA that have yet to be brought into the fold.

"We'll provide funding for their endeavors," he said, adding that there is "strong congressional interest" to leave the Coast Guard's R&D activities separate.

McQueary also said the department would issue its national strategy within the "next few to several weeks," outlining "large-scale" spending -- in the multimillion-dollar range -- for the his division to purchase and deploy technologies in 2006.

He said the division is working on international agreements through its Centers of Excellence program with universities, including an agreement with Canadian and Mexican universities to work with U.S. centers on "agro-terrorism" related to trading animals and food across the two borders with those nations.

The division also is negotiating with Britain on certain homeland security initiatives.

COMMENTS

• You're absolutely correct US. But who said anything about contractors? There are some very talented folks working for the Navy that would love to get their hands on a project like this if given the chance. I have no doubt they'd make us proud. Oh, as far as the Christmas card verses the pink slip is concerned. Right again on the odds of getting a pink slip. Especially if my director had his way. But with all I've seen and done in my 35 and 55 plus years of service, it's all down hill from here. Know what I mean? Art Doss Posted June 18, 2004 10:54 AM
• Sorry Mr. Doss, but if we were in fact to follow your suggestions, we would end up with contractors who supersede the cost of the contract by several million dollars, while producing little that is useful [recall TSB contractor fiasco]. In the end, they will likely claim that they are not responsible for anything [CACI not responsible for prisoner abuse, but they'll take the money], and ask, "What's a few million dollars in overcharges among friends? [Hello Halliburton]. Oh, as for your Christmas card? It will likely be a pink slip instead. GovExec.com reader Posted June 17, 2004 11:14 AM
• Here's a freebie for ya guys. Don't ignore medical technology. Thermal digital imaging, body mass index, a powerful laptop tied in to a probability scale indexed to let's say bone struture or density. Ya with me so far? Now set up a predetermined backdrop or background as a control or constant to move your suspects through. Actually different, overlapping constants might be a good idea. Get yourself a good design engineer and at least three or four good, open minded, "hands on" technicians. Give them the basic idea above and get out of their way. It may not be pretty. But, it just might work. If it doesn't it'll still lead to to a more refined system that will. However, if any of this does work out I'll expect a Christmas card. Art Doss Posted June 15, 2004 11:21 PM