The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is seeing progress in the development of container security devices (CSDs), advanced container security devices (ACSDs) and related communications technology is showing progress although challenges remain, the program manager for container security at DHS Science and Technology (S&T) tells TR2.
For CSDs and ACSDs, the S&T branch has four efforts underway in various stages of development. The goal with the CSDs is to be able to detect when doors have been opened and or removed whereas the ACSDs have the same requirement plus must be able to detect an intrusion into any side of the container, specifically a three inch circular hole or larger.
Successful development of the CSDs is “getting close,” says Ken Concepcion, the S&T program manager. “It’s a green light so far.” This progress will have a chance to be validated during a series of tests once deliveries of systems are made sometime this year, he says.
As for both CSDs and ACSDs, technically the systems are meeting the detection and intrusion requirements, Concepcion says. “But they need to be survivable throughout the supply chain and not compromise safety, which is where the setbacks have been.”
S&T has separate contracts with the Georgia Tech Research Institute and Science Applications International Corp. [SAI] for CSD development. The goal of the program is to help develop the various requirements and technical specifications that can be used by S&T’s stakeholders, in this case Customs and Border Protection, if and when they decide to further develop CSD technology or provide incentives to the trade community for its use in supply chains.
A Request for Information that CBP issued in late 2007 for conveyance security devices was based in part on technical and environmental specifications that S&T has generated through its ongoing CSD efforts, Concepcion says. S&T and CBP do stay in touch on these efforts, he says.
The development efforts are working out issues such as interoperable communications, power requirements, environmental issues such as operating in extreme temperatures, shock and vibration, and even restrictions that are driven by legal and regulatory processes that are related to the supply chain, Concepcion says. For example, he says, the supply chain has safety requirements that in turn affect the power supply for the CSDs so that there will be no sparks in the container, he says. The impact of those requirements on the power supply in turn determine how much processing, sensing and communications the CSD can have, he adds.
Georgia Tech is expected to deliver its units this summer for testing. Contract negotiations are still underway with SAIC so Concepcion couldn’t be sure exactly when the company will be delivering CSDs for final testing. In addition to testing to validate changes that have been made to the respective systems during the nearly five-year development process, there will be parallel deceit, defeat and vulnerability tests at Department of Energy labs, he says.
The CSDs are mounted inside the containers.
ACSD Work
Under the ACSD effort, S&T is working with one company on an internally mounted device that should be ready for a new round of testing in 12 to 18 months.
The ACSD program has also produced a novel approach to container security that involves making the sides of the containers themselves the actual sensors. This effort is being led by Maine Secure Composites, LLC (TR2, May 30, 2007).
Maine Secure Composites has been developing a “security grid” that can be woven into composite panels that are used to make the sides of the containers, including the floors. Concepcion describes this as a long-term effort. The container makes use of existing ISO container beams combined with the composite panels, resulting in a container that weighs about 50 percent less than standard, he says.
Challenges here include having the composite panels be able to accept the stresses any shipping container is subject to throughout the supply chain as well as making sure the security grid remains reliable, particularly on the floor. Concepcion says that in any shipping container, which all have wooden floors, there is often a need for drilling to be done into the floor so the security grid has to be able to accept this without triggering an alert. S&T also wants to be able to switch out any panel on a container if need be, he says.
Late this summer there will be testing on sample panels. Afterward composite container construction will get underway with final design and delivery roughly 18 to 24 months from now.
Separately under S&T’s container security efforts work is being done on the communications system that would work with any CSD-type unit to relay data to a command center. iControl, Inc., is developing the Marine Asset Tag Tracking System (MATTS) for S&T to create the requirements and standards for any future communications piece of the CSD solution, Concepcion says.
The MATTS device features cellular, radio frequency and satellite communications, GPS location, and a solar panel for a “trickle charge,” he says. Testing has been finished on everything but the satellite communications, which Concepcion says by itself should be easy. Rather it comes down to making sure the power requirements are right, he says.
Other development work that remains is for the mesh network communications so that CSDs, linked to a MATTS device, can communicate to separate MATTS devices on a ship or in a terminal yard to ensure that data reaches a remote command center.
One of the challenges with MATTS is that it is an externally mounted tag that connects to an internally mounted CSD. That link passes around the gasket on a container door, which has to remain weather-tight to meet regulations, Concepcion says.
S&T plans to test MATTS early next year to run through all of its capabilities. If everything is satisfactory, then the “technical requirements can be transitioned to our customers,” Concepcion says. However, he says, as with the CSD specifications and requirements, ultimately “it’s up to our customers to adopt this.”
The open standards being created in MATTS will be codified in an Interface Control Document so that anyone can build to it, he says.
Sometime early this year CBP had expected to begin an operational test of a conveyance security device supplied by General Electric [GE], called CommerceGuard, but the company withdrew from the test (TR2, Feb. 4). If the test had met CBP’s minimal requirements for operating a CSD in the supply chain the agency was going to consider ways it could incentivize the use of the systems. Now CBP says it will review the work S&T has ongoing and possibly even survey industry to see what other potential CSD solutions exist.