The Weakest Link: More Delays in Nuclear Detection at Borders

Experts say proposed technology not worth the $3 billion price tag.

ByABC News
October 31, 2008, 11:22 AM

October 31, 2008— -- It is one of the most likely ways that terrorists can cause mass casualties – a crude nuclear device smuggled into the country via a cargo container, truck, or boat. Yet, experts say, seven years after the 9/11 attacks, a gaping nuclear loophole remains at the nation's borders and seaports.

The original wide-sweeping and aggressive plan by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to install advanced radiation detection monitors at all the nation's seaports, borders, rail stations, and more has ballooned in cost even though its goals have been scaled back.

The program, according to the Government Accountability Office (GAO), was originally estimated at $1.2 billion two years ago and is now estimated to run over $3 billion, though the current plan eliminates placing monitors at rail stations and screening extra-wide trucks.

But cost is not the only issue; internal government investigations as well as outside experts have concluded that the new and 'advanced' radiation portal monitors that the Domestic Nuclear Detection Office (DNDO) proposes buying aren't worth their high price tag.

"The Advanced Spectroscopic Portal monitors are not cost-effective. Additional units should not be purchased," Tom Cochran, senior scientist at the Nuclear Program of the Natural Resources Defense Council, told Congress recently.

The new monitors, according to Cochran, do not reliably detect highly enriched uranium.

"If the threat has the wherewithal to develop an improvised nuclear explosive device out of HEU," Cochran said, "that same threat would have the wherewithal to defeat these systems almost 100 percent of the time".

Cochran also told Congress that he believes the priorities of the federal government's plan to protect the U.S. from a dirty bomb are misplaced and that the focus should be on eliminating the source of the material.

"I don't think we're going to solve this threat problem by pouring more money into advanced methods of detecting radiation coming across borders because the physics is simply against us with respect to the material that represents the greatest threat," said Cochran.