Title: TechBeat Summer 1998
Author: National Law Enforcement and Corrections
Technology Center
Subject: Law enforcement communications; technology in
law enforcement; corrections information management

Dedicated to Reporting Developments in Technology for
Law Enforcement, Corrections, and Forensics

Figures, charts, forms, and tables are not included in this
ASCII plain-text file. To view this document in its entirety,
download the Adobe Acrobat graphic file available from
this Web site or order a print copy from NLECTC at 800-
248-2742.

Car 54: Where Are You?

Communication is the backbone of law enforcement. But
even with all the communication technologies available
today, one of policing's biggest problems has yet to be
solved--interoperability--the ability of law enforcement and
other public safety agencies at all levels to communicate
across jurisdictions a problem that has existed since the
earliest days of radio communications.

But to tackle the issue of interoperability, the scope of the
problem first needed to be assessed. This task was picked
up by the National Institute of Justice (NIJ), which
surveyed approximately 2,800 individual agencies through
its National Law Enforcement and Corrections Technology
Center (NLECTC) Rocky Mountain, in Denver, Colorado.

The Study

"We asked more than 120 questions, which the statisticians
said was pushing the limit," says Tom Tolman, manager of
communications technology at NLECTC Rocky Mountain.
"But the methodology worked! The result was an
exhaustive look at communications, interoperability, and
how individual agencies view or have handled
interoperability problems." Among the significant findings,
Tolman says, were:

o "Dead spots" (specific locations where no radio
transmission or reception is experienced) and outdated
equipment were cited as the most serious and common
communication problems. 

o Channel congestion was also cited as a significant
problem, especially for larger agencies and State police.
Ninety-one percent have channels dedicated to voice-only
transmission, 27 percent had data-only transmission
channels, and 19 percent used alternate voice and data
channels. Agencies that reported a need for more channels
said a 40-percent increase in voice channels and a
70-percent increase in data channels would begin to
alleviate channel congestion.

o The use of mobile computers and the transmission of
images, fingerprints, and videos is expected to double in the
next 2 years. Within 5 years, many agencies plan to use
cellular phones with greater frequency, and at least 40
percent said they expect to use global positioning systems.
In short, the use of advanced technology, and therefore the
need for additional frequencies, is expected to triple.

o Although most agencies have conventional analog
systems and operate at the high end of the VHF band,
almost half said they planned to upgrade in the next 10
years. The report predicted that those operating at 800 MHz
will more than double; those using digital systems will
increase from 13 to 25 percent; and those using trunked
systems (which automatically route the user to an open
channel) will increase from 24 to 27 percent.

The report also revealed a few surprises. The first, and
possibly the most interesting, was that many local agencies
see interoperability much differently than those at the
Federal level. Local agencies reported they regularly
communicate with neighboring municipal agencies. Less
frequently, however, did they communicate with their State
agencies, and only rarely with agencies at the Federal level.
It seems that local agencies, in lieu of national
interoperability standards, have instead relied on their own
creativity to cobble together solutions. In fact, 82 percent
said they have one channel dedicated solely to
communicating with nearby organizations.

"Eighty-two percent is great," Tolman says, "but it's still
only one channel. Denver, for example, is on the 800
frequency and can communicate with other agencies. But
those agencies need 800 megahertz capability also. Many
of the cities surrounding Denver operate on the 450 or 150
bands."

Other "low-tech" solutions cited in the study include the
use of walkie-talkies and scanners, posting representatives
in a dispatch center to relay information, and issuing
mobile radios to other agencies.

The second revelation in the report was the lack of
awareness about communications technology, equipment,
and industrywide standards. "Most agencies were unaware
of the major sweeping changes the FCC [Federal
Communications Commission] has been making with
regard to spectrum," Tolman says. "The result is that these
agencies are vulnerable. For instance, a new Denver
television station tried to install a 5-million-watt
transmitter. It was so powerful and so close to our public
safety agencies that it would have created severe
interference. And once you throw the switch on a television
station, it's difficult to turn it off."

However, according to Tolman, because the agencies in the
Denver area that would have been affected had a high level
of awareness, they were able to keep it from happening.
But, he says, the same thing happened in another State,
only this time the affected agencies were unable to stop the
station from starting up. In the end, the sheriff's department
had to move.

Tolman says that the total radio spectrum, which represents
3,300 frequencies, is such a hot commodity that some
commercial providers have offered thousands of dollars to
police agencies, hoping to buy frequencies. According to
Tolman, they have been known to approach some of the
smaller agencies or cities and offer them $20,000 for a
frequency pair. What the agency or city officials don't
know is that frequency might have been worth as much as
$250,000.

Many agencies, he says, were also unaware of the Project
25 Interoperability Standards, a set of voluntary standards
created by the Association of Public Safety
Communications Officials about 10 years ago. One of the
goals of Project 25 is to stop the proliferation of proprietary
protocols in communications equipment and to develop
technical standards for the next generation of radios. But
not all manufacturers have complied. The lack of industry
cooperation has made law enforcement's awareness and
acceptance of the standards agonizingly slow.

While the FCC's decisions have attempted to alleviate
spectrum crowding, Tolman says that some of them have
caused concern among law enforcement agencies, as
evidenced by two of the interoperability study's major
findings: Most departments said that if the Federal
Government were going to set standards and require that
agencies buy new equipment to comply, the Federal
Government should also provide funding to defray the cost.
The majority of agencies surveyed also preferred local
planning, saying that they communicate primarily with
local agencies, and less frequently with State and/or Federal
agencies. Their confidence level in their ability to
communicate with other local departments under almost
any conditions was high, while their confidence in their
ability to establish radio communication links with State or
Federal agencies was low.

Study Into Action

Published in early 1998, the study titled Wireless
Communications and Interoperability Among State and
Local Law Enforcement Agencies, has met with
widespread interest from law enforcement, industry, and
the FCC.

"The FCC, the Federal Emergency Management
Association, and other public safety organizations
approached us and said they liked the study so much that
they wanted us to do a similar fire/EMS study," Tolman
says. "We agreed, and have already developed a
questionnaire and handed it over to the Public Safety
Wireless Network, which is involved in the planning and
development of a nationwide shared wireless
telecommunications network for use by Federal, State, and
local law enforcement and public safety agencies.

"We also want the study to be a useful tool for agencies
when they go before their city council, when they're
making buying decisions. They'll have evidence that the
lack of interoperability is a chronic, nationwide problem,
not just one agency complaining. The study can also be
used as the basis of future legislation and radio spectrum
decisions. It is a dissemination and a representation of a
collective voice that says these are the problems this is
what's really happening out on the front lines."

In addition to the interoperability study, NLECTC Rocky
Mountain, through NIJ, is producing a video on
interoperability for the Attorney General that provides an
overview of interoperability and the public safety radio
spectrum issues. The primary audience for the video is
high- to mid-level State and local public officials who have
a need to plan, design, and fund public safety wireless
communications.

In addition, NLECTC Rocky Mountain is conducting a
study on commercial services available for the public safety
telecommunications community. This will result in a useful
guidebook that will help agencies determine if commercial
services can fulfill any of their wireless communications
needs, and how they would go about obtaining the best
solutions.

Finally, because the interoperability study indicated a
severe lack of knowledge and awareness of the problem
within law enforcement communities, NLECTC Rocky
Mountain conducted a statewide Interoperability Forum for
the State of Colorado this past May. The forum provided
Colorado State public safety officials the opportunity to
identify core communications issues and to learn about
communications options available to them, such as
additional frequencies. The meeting also provided a
platform for officials to discuss possible actions to take,
such as developing a State unified plan for conducting
pursuits.

For a copy of the study, Wireless Communications and
Interoperability Among State and Local Law Enforcement
Agencies, contact the National Criminal Justice Reference
Service (NCJRS), at 800-851-3420. The study can also be
viewed and downloaded by accessing the NCJRS World
Wide Web site: www.ncjrs.org. For more information
about the study itself or current interoperability projects,
contact Tom Tolman or Robert Epper, NLECTC-Rocky
Mountain, 800-416-8086.

NIJ Initiates Prison Riot

On the morning of April 25, 1998, five basketball players
from West Virginia's Wheeling Jesuit University and four
corrections officers were taken hostage during an exhibition
game with a prison inmate team at the State penitentiary in
Moundsville, West Virginia. The situation occurred when
one of the inmates faked a heart attack to draw a prison
guard into the confined court area, where he was
overpowered by other inmates who had a hidden gun.

This event was not covered on the nightly television news,
nor did the story appear in the Nation's major newspapers
the following day. But, there were a number of law
enforcement and corrections officials who were very much
aware of this serious situation. They were on hand to
witness this event and the ensuing riot. This time,
fortunately, the riot was in reality an exercise in crisis
management and a demonstration of the latest
crimefighting technologies.

The April mock prison riot was actually the second one
staged in as many years at the former West Virginia
Penitentiary in Moundsville. This year's event featured a
number of preplanned scenarios involving prisoner
uprisings, hostage negotiations, and demonstrations of
more than 60 emerging law enforcement and corrections
technologies. The event was organized by the National
Institute of Justice's (NIJ's) Office of Law Enforcement
Technology Commercialization (OLETC), the West
Virginia Division of Corrections, and the Moundsville
Economic Development Council, with assistance from the
departments of corrections from Ohio and Pennsylvania, as
well as Wheeling Jesuit University (WJU). Approximately
150 criminal justice students from Ohio, West Virginia,
Pennsylvania, and Maryland, and several corrections
officers from West Virginia, became inmates and hostages.
More than 100 medical, fire, and emergency response
personnel also participated in support roles to treat and
evacuate staged injuries.

Several emerging technologies were incorporated into a
number of the training scenarios while other technologies
were showcased in field demonstrations and in an exhibit
area. The technologies were developed by product 
manufacturers, entrepreneurs, inventors, the U.S.
Department of Defense, the National Aeronautics and
Space Administration (NASA), and the U.S. Department of
Energy. They included night vision devices, security
systems, officer protection products, nonlethal weapons,
prisoner restraints, communication tools, training,
drug/explosive detection systems and devices,
see-through-wall-and-smoke technology, and personal
location/tracking systems. Special focus demonstrations
were showcased for telemedicine technology in responding
to staged injuries resulting from the mock riot, along with
technology related to interoperability and communications,
and advanced night vision technologies. Tactical team
training scenarios included responses to a basketball game
stabbing, three cell block takeovers, a total-darkness
capture, a chapel uprising, a high-speed auto escape, and a
river boat escape attempt.

Paul Kirby, co-chair for the event and warden at West
Virginia's Northern Regional Jail and Correction Facility,
says that the combination of technology and crisis training
made the mock prison riot a unique event. "We're not
aware of any other groups that mix new technologies both
in and out of the marketplace with prison riot training
scenarios," he adds.

Detective Ken Miller of the Parkersburg, West Virginia,
Police Department and Dave Fromhart, a corrections officer
at the Northern Regional Jail and Correction Facility, were
in charge of the hostage negotiations. The "inmates" were
led by WJU student Mike Oravec, a veteran of last year's
mock prison riot, and Eddie Littell, a West Virginia
Division of Corrections officer, who brought real-life
experience as a hostage to the event. Littell had been held
captive for 14 hours at the West Virginia Penitentiary
during the 1986 New Year's Day inmate uprising.

More than 300 observers from numerous Federal and State
corrections and law enforcement agencies, public and
private organizations, and private companies attended this
year's riot event, including corrections officers from 38
States and three countries. More than 75 tactical personnel
from Ohio, Pennsylvania, West Virginia, Puerto Rico, and
the Federal Bureau of Prisons actively participated in the
riot training scenarios.

For more information or a videotape about this year's mock
prison riot and the technologies demonstrated, contact Tom
Burgoyne at OLETC, 888-306-5382.

'Land Rush' of the 1990s

Thirty-plus years ago when police radios were
underpowered and cumbersome, one officer voiced his
frustration about his inability to communicate with his
fellow officers this way: "Mission Control could talk to
astronauts on the Moon, but we couldn't talk to our partner
around the corner, less than a block away."

Sadly, when public safety agencies cannot communicate
with each other or when communication links break down,
the results can be disastrous everything from confusion to
loss of life. Illustrative of this problem was a pursuit that
occurred in southern California involving numerous
agencies, none of which could communicate with each
other.

The incident started when an officer tried to pull over a
vehicle for a traffic violation. When the driver refused to
stop, the pursuit spilled over into the neighboring
jurisdiction, and another officer joined the chase. Because
the officers could not communicate with one another, they
had to give information to their respective dispatchers, who
then relayed it to the other jurisdiction's communications
supervisor, who then relayed it to his dispatcher, who then
gave it to the officer. As the chase continued, units from
two State and Federal agencies joined in, as did several
more from neighboring jurisdictions. And even a local
security guard switched on his lights and tagged along.

The second officer to join the chase described the scene:
"Here we were, most of us not able to talk to one another,
no one really knowing where we were going, where we
were, or why. Because we could not communicate with one
another, no one really had any idea who was involved in
the chase or what their function was. We also had units
from all over trying to join in the chase, which meant folks
cutting one another off and forcing us to lose ground on the
crook. And the crook was driving with that old 'reckless
abandon,' which meant he was close to having a wreck."

Had the officers involved been able to communicate, they
might have devised a plan for roadblocks or paralleled the
chase to create a show of force to discourage the suspect.
They might have moved ahead of the pursuit and set up a
perimeter in case the driver abandoned the car and fled on
foot.

But police pursuits are not the only multiagency activity
hampered by communications problems. When a fire broke
out in northern California, response times were slowed
because there was no common radio channel. The agencies
that responded had to trade radios so they could
communicate with one another. The lack of
interoperability, which is the ability to communicate across
jurisdictional boundaries, may get worse as agencies are
increasingly called upon to cooperate in everything from
pursuits to hazardous material (HazMat) incidents, and
from natural disasters to incidents of domestic terrorism.

The radio spectrum is analogous to the Oklahoma land rush
of the late 1800s, when space was at a premium and
everyone wanted to stake a claim to their very own bit of
earth. Only today the land grab is actually an "airway
grab"; radio frequencies are at a premium and everyone
wants a claim on them.

The radio spectrum, which represents a range of roughly
3,000 frequencies, is like real estate there is only so much
ground to go around. This would not be a problem but for
our country's skyrocketing use of personal communications
devices such as cellular phones and pagers. To address the
problem, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC)
in the early 1990s decided to release for use various
frequencies of the radio spectrum through auctions, instead
of through lotteries or comparative hearings to assign
licenses. This action precluded preferential treatment for
public service agencies despite their mission of service to
the public. Instead, the available frequencies were awarded
to the highest bidder. The FCC has since raised some $12
billion and plans to continue auctioning off frequencies.

Much of the available spectrum has gone to personal
communications service (PCS) providers or to those who
provide frequencies for cell phones, pagers, and other
wireless products. Law enforcement and other public safety
agencies are feeling the squeeze as they try to adopt new
technologies that allow the transmission of text and
graphics, in addition to voice. In response to law
enforcement's demands and as a result of a 1996 study
done by the Public Safety Wireless Advisory Committee,
the FCC in late 1997 doubled the total frequencies available
to public safety by reallocating television channels. Such
action will help alleviate what has become a critical
shortage of available frequencies, but it will not fully solve
the problem.

Although today's lightweight, programmable, portable
radios have plenty of power to communicate within a
department, modern technology is still struggling to find a
way for neighboring departments to talk to one another
without having to use multiple radios. One manufacturer
tried solving the problem by building a repeater with
cross-band capability into its mobile radio. The repeater
allows the officer with a low-powered radio to extend his
communication range while the cross-band capability
allows communication across two specific frequencies.
Currently, there are two manufacturers making dual-band
radios that operate on 150 and 450 MHz. But the cost of
these units, which can be as high as $3,000 each, may put it
out of the financial range of many agencies.

Another solution has been the move by some agencies to an
800 MHz system, which operates at a frequency higher than
typically used by law enforcement agencies. The advantage
is that in emergencies, multiple agencies can be grouped on
one channel if they are all using the 800 MHz frequency.
The disadvantage is that these systems can be expensive,
which could preclude smaller departments from
implementing them. An 800 MHz system also may not
have the range necessary for patrol officers unless the
department installs a series of repeaters to pick up the
signal and rebroadcast it, which constitutes yet another
expense.

On a positive note, the FCC has designated one national
law enforcement emergency channel--at 155.475 MHz.
However, the problem is that both law enforcement and
public safety agencies need to have this frequency on their
radios.

From the Street. . . to the Street

The National Institute of Justice (NIJ) has long believed
that one of the most vital aspects of its program is the
solicitation of ideas and suggestions of criminal justice
practitioners. It is this information that forms the
framework of NIJ's work. NIJ's Office of Science and
Technology (OS&T) and its National Law Enforcement
and Corrections Technology Center (NLECTC) system get
this information through conferences, regional workshops,
and most especially through a series of advisory groups.
These groups are composed of representatives from all
areas of law enforcement, corrections, and the forensic
sciences, and focus on everything from operational
technological needs to liability issues and public acceptance
of these new technologies.

One such group, the Law Enforcement and Corrections
Technology Advisory Council (LECTAC), 
is a group of criminal justice practitioners who serve as
advisers to the NLECTC system and recommend program
priorities. Because LECTAC's members are also the end
users of new technologies, they keep the NLECTC system
in touch with the realities of the street by bringing the
immediate needs of police and corrections officers to the
attention of staff, who then pass them on to researchers,
scientists, and engineers.

LECTAC's current list of research priorities include the
development of technologies in the areas of concealed
weapons and contraband detection, vehicle stopping,
enhanced DNA testing, officer protection, less-than-lethal
tools, information management, counterterrorism, location
and tracking, secure communications, and noninvasive drug
detection. Following are updates on several sample projects
that fall under these headings.

o Through-The-Wall Surveillance System. This device uses
radar to locate and track an individual through concrete or
brick walls. It is a portable, briefcase-sized system
originally developed by Raytheon Company (formerly
Hughes Missile Systems), and is a modification of an
existing commercial motion detector sold by Hughes. The
system was successfully demonstrated with the Los
Angeles County Sheriff's Department and the Albuquerque
Police Department under quasi-operational conditions. It
consistently tracked the activity of an individual moving
behind an 8-inch-thick concrete wall to a range of about 75
feet from the radar. NIJ plans to procure a number of these
devices for operational evaluation with law enforcement
agencies in 1998-1999.

o Ring Airfoil Projectile (RAP). The RAP is a rubber ring
that weighs about 1 ounce and looks like a napkin ring.
Fired from an M 16A1 rifle, the nonlethal RAP flies
straight and fast (185 to 210 feet per second). With NIJ
funding, the RAP is undergoing further development so it
can be used by State and local police in crowd control
situations, including its use as a vehicle to deliver pepper
spray. An effort is also focused on finding a new
delivery/launching system, rather than the M-16 rifle.

o Smart Gun. No greater risk attends police work than a
struggle during which an offender takes the officer's gun.
NIJ's smart gun project is developing technology through
which an officer's gun will only "recognize" its authorized
user and become inoperable in the hand of any other
person. Colt's Manufacturing Co., Inc. has come up with a
prototype that puts a transmitter on the officer's wrist.
Using radio frequency identification, the weapon
recognizes only the coded signal sent by the transmitter.
Colt and NIJ are working with Smartlink, a company that
specializes in biometrics and "smart cards," to miniaturize
the transponder chips and circuits required for the weapon
to work.

o Advanced Body Armor Inserts. This project is a
collaborative effort among NIJ, the U.S. Army Soldier
Systems' Command, U.S. Army Research Laboratory, and
the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency to
develop lighter ballistic inserts for tactical body armor that
will stop armor-piercing bullets. Two contractor teams
undertook this development effort: Allied-Signal and
Simula, Inc. Both teams used a ceramic-composite insert;
the ceramic breaks the bullet while the composite material,
the backplate or backface, "catches" the pieces. Testing
indicated a 30-percent improvement in performance against
a 7.62mm armor-piercing bullet, compared to the ballistic
insert used in the military's existing Ranger Body Armor
System. The U.S. Army Soldier Systems' Command will
test the prototypes and make a final evaluation as to
performance by the end of this year.

o Voice Response Translator (VRT) Device. This device,
developed under an NIJ grant using Office of Community
Oriented Policing Services (COPS) funding, is carried on
the officer's belt, and lets an English-speaking officer
communicate with people who have difficulty with or
cannot comprehend English. Commands are given in one of
three languages and are designed to elicit the appropriate
physical response or gesture. Using the device, officers can
query, inform, and direct the actions of
non-English-speaking persons. Officers can choose any of
three different languages with a simple voice command.
The use of voice-prompted commands makes the VRT
capable of hands-free operation.

Intended for use in both routine and emergency encounters,
the VRT was developed by Integrated Wave Technologies.
Prototype devices capable of more than 500 Cantonese,
Spanish, and Vietnamese phrases have been tested by the
Oakland, California, Police Department (OPD). OPD
evaluated the relevancy of the phrases, the post-translation
appropriateness of the phrases (i.e., from English), and the
ergonomic aspects of the device's physical configuration.
OPD also assessed citizen and community group reaction to
the VRT. Prototype VRT devices are currently about 5 by 5
by 2 inches in size and use affordable electronic
components that can be easily miniaturized. Future
prototypes will likely be reduced to the size of a handheld
calculator.

o Laser Dazzler. This handheld device uses a random
flashing green light to disorient and distract a subject. The
current prototype is 24 inches long, weighs 4.8 pounds, and
looks like a flashlight. From its 2.7-inch diameter lens, it
emits a green laser that can distract, disorient, or
temporarily immobilize a suspect or a crowd. To the
subject, it appears as if the flashing light is random and
coming from all directions, not from a single source. This
has the effect of creating an "optical wall" of light between
police and the subject. The police can see everything, but
the subject cannot see past the wall. According to the
developer, the officer can walk right up to a suspect, and
the suspect will never see the officer coming. The dazzler,
which is not on the commercial market yet, works in any
weather, and from 50 to 200 meters. It is eye-safe at the
aperture, with no stand-off range. The device is awaiting
bioeffects testing and eye safety certification, which will
clear the way for the dazzler's demonstration and
evaluation by the military. The project was funded by NIJ
and the Defense Advanced Research Project Agency
through the Joint Program Steering Group. Certification
data also will be made available to NIJ so it can determine
whether it will endorse similar testing of the dazzler by
police agencies.

o Utica Arson Strike Force. The Utica Arson Strike Force
was assembled in April 1997 to combat a critical arson
problem in Utica, New York. The problem was so severe
that Utica was the only northern city to be included in the
National Arson Initiative, which covered the States where
church fires were set in 1996. The strike force consists of
Federal, State, and local law enforcement agencies, and
State and local fire agencies, organized into teams to
perform cause and origin analysis and provide technical
support. NIJ's NLECTC-Northeast office in Rome, New
York, provided a local area network and technical support
to establish a model investigative strike force as a
demonstration site for the rest of the country. Prior to April
1997, Utica's arson closure rate was 2 percent (the national
average is 15 percent.) Utica is now approaching a
60-percent closure rate, with a 100-percent conviction rate.

NLECTC-Northeast is continuing to monitor the computer
network used by the Arson Strike Force so it can be used as
a model for other investigative teams. The Arson Strike
Force currently uses the computer network for preparation
of court documents, e-mail communication, and Internet
access. The initial success of the Arson Strike Force was so
overwhelming that old cases were reopened and closed by
arrest. To better share information, the strike force
members also developed a shared database concept that
includes the necessary CAD/RMS (computer-aided
dispatch/records management systems) infrastructure to
facilitate the sharing and analysis of information between
agencies in four central New York counties. The model of
the strike force also is being adapted for a drug task force.

o Explosive Diagnostic System. This project brings
together NIJ, the U. S. Departments of Justice and Defense,
and the FBI to demonstrate and evaluate improved
diagnostic systems for explosive devices. The first
technology being evaluated is the RTR-3, a
computer-based, portable x-ray system that enables the
diagnosis of explosive devices in real-time. It also enables
the transmission of x-ray images of those devices, via
modem, to remote experts for analysis. Agreements
currently are being developed with 24 State and local
agencies to evaluate the RTR-3. Also supporting the project
is the Naval Surface Warfare Center, Indian Head Division,
and Naval Office of Special Technology.

For more information on NIJ law enforcement and
corrections technology projects, visit the NLECTC World
Wide Web site, JUSTNET, at www.nlectc.org, or call
NLECTC-National at 800-248-2742.

Wanted: Clinkers, Clunkers, and Lemons

There isn't a fleet manager alive who hasn't been frustrated
by the cost of vehicle breakdowns. Although calculating
per-mile costs, along with the costs of oil, tires, and regular
maintenance is easy, it's those unanticipated repairs and the
expense required to put a vehicle back into service that
throw a very big wrench into a department's budget.

The National Institute of Justice (NIJ), in conjunction with
its Office of Law Enforcement Standards (OLES) at the
National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), is
working on computer software to help fleet managers avoid
these unwelcome surprises and to help them with vehicle
disposal decisions. Dubbed AutoRank, this software
program will help determine when a vehicle will break
down, by its specific make, model, and year, thereby giving
the fleet manager the opportunity to dispose of it before it
causes problems.

"Fleet managers don't know when the transmission is going
to break down or when they're going to have to do a ring
job," says Stephen Weber, principal investigator on the
AutoRank project. "But it is just those mini-catastrophic
failures that we're trying to anticipate."

According to Weber, a long-time NIST economist and
developer of AutoBid, a widely used police vehicle
selection software, AutoRank will classify and analyze
vehicle failure data. Weber says that he is currently
collecting data from agencies with fleets of at least 200
vehicles. He says that by studying the subsystems and
major components in each vehicle model, and collecting
data on the points when each of these subsystems or
components fail, AutoRank will be able to estimate with
relative accuracy when a specific model is likely to have
problems.

"We will pick out the most significant failures, the ones
that represent a $200 hit and that have some likelihood of
occurrence in the coming year," Weber says. "The fleet
manager will take general information about the car, add
information about the most recent work on it, along with
data on the most recent replacement or repair of any of the
16 to 20 subsystems we specify in the program. AutoRank
will compute all of the information and produce a list,
ranked by priority, of the vehicles most appropriate for
disposal. These may not necessarily be the oldest ones. But
they will be the ones that are going to cost the 
most in the coming year," he says.

To better publicize the AutoRank project and to garner
participation from law enforcement fleet managers, Weber
attended the annual meeting of the Law Enforcement Group
of the National Association of Fleet Administrators, where
he gave a presentation to the 250 law enforcement members
in attendance. "Their response was very positive," he says.

Weber is still looking for participants to contribute to the
data pool. He would like to hear from those who manage
fleets of at least 200 vehicles of a particular model and
year, 2 or more years old. Participants, he says, should be
able to supply the following data:

o For each vehicle class: Manufacturer, model, year,
depreciation rate, cost per mile, and cost per month.

o For each vehicle: VIN (Vehicle Identification Number),
primary use (urban, suburban, highway), date put in
service, current mileage, and purchase price.

o For each failure category: Failure description and repair
description.

o For each failure: Date of failure, cause of failure, mileage
at time of failure, date of repair, mileage at time of repair,
labor hours, and materials cost.

"We are collecting and analyzing failure data on cars that
have been out there in the field, so the summary data
included in AutoRank readily applies to today's fleets,"
Weber says. "Fleet managers will simply add the
particulars about when their own vehicles have been
repaired. AutoRank will give them a list of vehicles ready
for disposal based on expected repair costs, operation and
maintenance costs, and the loss of resale value. We expect
AutoRank to produce a significant cost savings for law
enforcement agencies!"

For more information about AutoRank or to contribute to 
the data pool, contact Stephen Weber at the National
Institute of Standards and Technology, 301-975-6137, or
e-mail him at sweber@nist.gov. The police vehicle
selection software program AutoBid can be accessed
through JUSTNET, the World Wide Web site of the
National Law Enforcement and Corrections Technology
Center system, at www.nlectc.org.

Catch of the Day

Although the National Institute of Justice (NIJ) continues to
study, evaluate, and develop vehicle-stopping technologies,
it is not the only entity working on the vehicle-stopping
problem. The U.S. Department of Defense's (DoD's) Joint
Non-Lethal Weapons Directorate (JNLWD) also is
performing a similar function. This DoD program office
integrates the concerns and efforts of various military
activities regarding vehicle stopping as well as nonlethal
weapons development.

One JNLWD project involves the stopping of fleeing
vehicles with a giant net that gradually drags the targeted
vehicle to a halt. This concept is similar to that used to
bring high-performance aircraft to a halt on aircraft carriers.
The net is being developed for the JNLWD by Primex
Technologies, in conjunction with the U.S. Army's
Armament Research, Development, and Engineering
Center (ARDEC), in Dover, New Jersey.

The net's operating principle is simple: two anchors are
embedded into the ground on either side of a roadway. A
net is placed inside a trough that extends across the width
of the roadway. The trough looks like a small speed bump.
One brake box is attached to each anchor. Each end of the
net is connected by a cable to a brake box. To stop a
targeted vehicle, an officer simply pushes a button to
activate the net's deployment. The net pops out of the
trough and extends across the roadway in the path of the
targeted vehicle. The vehicle extends the net and pulls the
cables that are attached to each brake box. Then, like the
cable on an aircraft carrier, the brake box exerts enough
force to slow the vehicle to a stop. The net wraps around
the vehicle, preventing anyone inside from escaping.

"Our criteria was that we couldn't decelerate a car at more
than 2g's, which is about double what a panic stop in your
car would be," notes Primex Technologies' Randy Hoskins,
the director of advanced development for solid propellant
systems. "The speed at which you stop depends on how
much the vehicle weighs and how fast you're going. The
box is designed so that the farther you pull the line out, the
harder it pulls on you, and the more brake force 
it adds."

Primex demonstrated a prototype of the Car Catcher in
1997. Those tests included running a pickup truck into the
net 25 times over a range of velocities and in differing
conditions (weight added to the truck, net configurations).
Although the net worked every time, the damage to the
truck was obvious after about four stops. "The first time the
truck looked okay," Hoskins says. "The second time it was
okay. But after the fourth stop, we had a hard time opening
the door because the fenders were shoved back a little bit.
The sheet metal deformed slightly. It's obviously not meant
to stop the same vehicle over and over again."

The Car Catcher, however, does require set-up time. In an
area with sparse vegetation (notably, trees), officers may
need to dig holes in the ground to anchor the device,
something that takes about 2 hours. But it can also be
anchored to existing trees, telephone poles, or other fixed
objects, which reduces the set-up time to about 20 minutes.

Lt. Bob Osborne, of the Los Angeles County Sheriff's
Department, is a member of NIJ's Pursuit Management
Task Force (PMTF). PMTF is conducting an indepth study
of pursuits and available technologies. Osborne attended
the Car Catcher demonstration. "It has some great
features," Osborne says. "I liked the way the net seemed to
envelop the car to prevent flight. We literally had to undo
the car from the net to get the doors open. I also liked the
way it was set up. It spanned two lanes, so you would have
to go off-road to avoid it. It also looked like it deployed in
about 1 to 1.5 seconds. That's pretty fast. If you're driving
at any speed, it's not enough time to take any kind of
evasive action," he says.

Ray Downs, Ph.D., Deputy Director of NIJ's Research and
Technology Development Division and manager of NIJ's
Less-Than-Lethal Weapons program, also was enthusiastic
about the Car Catcher. "I liked it because it's solid science.
It looks like a technology that can really stop a vehicle,"
Downs says. However, the Car Catcher may not be an
appropriate device for general law enforcement purposes.

Its set-up time, even at 20 minutes, is too long, especially
when statistics have shown that most pursuits are over in 6
minutes. It leaves a trail of rope, net, and cables on the
road, which would require that police stop all traffic
traveling behind the suspect vehicle. In a heavily traveled
area, it could also be difficult to target the right car.
Untangling the vehicle from the net also takes some time--
about 15 minutes--and requires that officers push the car
backward to create slack in the net. On the plus side,
however, its one-button operation makes it easy to use, and
it takes almost no special skill or knowledge to set it up or
repack it for reuse.

According to Hoskins, the Car Catcher is perfect for the
military. It may become part of the security hierarchy at
temporary military facilities and can be used to control
traffic in countries where warring factions are a danger to
the military and the local citizens. "We believe it also has
an application at border crossings," Hoskins says. "There is
always a problem with port-of-entry runners and with
people trying to drive through border checkpoints. Since it
is portable, it could be set up in places where you expect to
have problems. It can also be permanently installed," he
adds.

The Car Catcher could also be used against terrorist threats,
Downs says, in cases where there is concern that vehicles
loaded with explosives may be used for suicide missions.
"You don't want the vehicle to crash, and you don't want to
use gunfire to stop it. In situations like that, where lethal
force might be appropriate but where it would be a mistake,
this kind of device would work," he says.

Primex currently is making the Car Catcher more user
friendly. At the Army's request, Primex will make it easier
to use, lighter, and more weatherproof.

For more information about the Car Catcher, or as the
Army has named it, the Pre-Emplaced Vehicle
Immobilizer, contact Randy Hoskins at Primex
Technologies, 425-882-5772, or David Millette, the Army's
program manager for the project, 973-724-6246.

Ohio Inmates Get 'Carded'

The Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction
(ODRC) is helping lead the way toward a revolution in
inmate information management with a pilot project that
has prisoners using "smart cards."

According to Peggy Ritchie-Matsumoto, Deputy Director
of ODRC's Office of Management Information Systems
and a systems strategist, this project, funded by the
National Institute of Justice (NIJ), marries computer chips
with photo identification cards. Initially the cards will be
used to track the medication activity of 2,300 inmates in a
medium-security men's facility.

"It's like a driver's license with a computer chip in it,"
Ritchie-Matsumoto says. "The inmate's photo is
electronically stored, as is the data that says who he is and
what his inmate number is. When an inmate comes up to
the pharmacy, he puts the card into a reader that scans the
information on the microchip contained in the card. If I'm
the pharmacist, what I see on my computer screen is the
inmate's pharmacy record. I know what his history is and
what medication he is to have. I'll also know if he has
refused meds before, or if he has not picked up his meds.
This system will track all of that," she says.

According to Ritchie-Matsumoto, a processor and memory
chip are embedded in the card, and they have the capacity
for offline storage as well as encryption for security.
Benefits of the system include an increased ability to
manage inmate data and a faster process for dispensing
medication. ODRC currently spends 1 minute per patient
dispensing medication. The smart card is expected to
significantly reduce the time required to complete this
paper-intensive process from 1 minute to a few seconds.

The smart card project relies on software created by the
Battelle Institute, a nonprofit company that works with
national security, health, environmental, transportation, and
industrial technologies. Battelle has been involved with
smart card technologies since 1980. The company helped
the U.S. Department of Defense develop electronic dog tags
for soldiers in Desert Storm and create a smart card for
colleges/universities that deducts purchases from student
accounts.

Smart cards can involve several different types of
technologies and can be issued for a variety of purposes.
Some provide access to restricted areas and some are
service related, like telephone calling cards or those that
deduct purchases from a holder's account. Some can be
used for identification purposes only, while others enable
remote payment, money access, and information exchange
via computer, telephone, or television "set-top boxes."
Biometric information, such as fingerprints, eye scans, or
"finger geometry," which takes measurements of the finger
and converts it to a three-dimensional model for matching,
can all be used to verify the card user's identity.

Smart cards are especially popular in Europe, where many
automatic teller machines require a thumbprint for
identification. In Australia, where there is a national debit
card system and where noncash payments are growing at
about 50 percent each year, smart cards are proliferating
rapidly. But to date, the cards have not been as well
received in the United States. When Utah legislators in
1997 talked about implementing a smart card driver's
license, one of the biggest concerns was about the privacy
of the data. When New Jersey began considering a smart
card driver's license that would include a fingerprint of the
driver, the American Civil Liberties Union protested, and
the idea eventually was scrapped.

"Privacy issues also figure prominently in discussions
about using smart cards for health care,"
Ritchie-Matsumoto says. "I just don't think the public is
ready for a smart card where you walk into a doctor's office
and have your whole medical history come up onscreen."

"There is a lot of resistance to smart cards in the general
population, which is why part of the research is happening
in closed environments like prisons, universities, and in the
medical arena," she says. "The public in this country
doesn't seem quite ready to have smart cards, but it is
definitely where we're going. Pretty soon our computer
keyboards will have biometrics built right into them. Even
now there is a user identification device that can be plugged
into the keyboard."

Although smart card technology is still in its infancy in the
United States--Americans bought only 2 percent of the 826
million cards sold worldwide in 1996--it is a technology
that is gaining popularity. A 1997 conference sponsored by
the Smart Card Industry Association boasted 530 exhibitors
and 7,500 attendees from 65 countries. Total card sales in
the United States are expected to increase as well, rising
from 2 percent in 1996 to 15 percent of total worldwide
sales by 2000.

According to Ritchie-Matsumoto, the ODRC smart card
project is not just addressing the technical aspects of this
technology. Attendant issues also are being considered,
such as the legality and acceptability of an electronic
signature and the problem of authenticating a pharmacist's
signature. The ODRC is working with the Ohio State
Pharmacy Board on a workable solution. Another issue
being addressed, she says, concerns inmate reaction to the
cards.

"It's difficult to predict. Will they destroy their cards? Will
they try to exchange their cards? Will they try to carve the
chip out of the cards? If this project is successful and the
card becomes so totally integrated that the inmates need it
for meals, access to certain areas, or to the commissary, my
guess is that they won't do anything to damage it,"
Ritchie-Matsumoto says.

In the early stages, Ritchie-Matsumoto says, the smart
cards will be integrated with the ODRC's electronic
photo-imaging system, so that when the card is used, it will
automatically bring up a picture of the inmate on a
computer screen. In the future, however, plans are to
activate magnetic strips, bar coding, and some form of
biometric identification. The vision is for a multiuse card
that pertains to many aspects of prison life. Inmate
classification, medical and mental health information,
education status, and parole information will be stored on
the microchip.

For more information on the project, contact Peggy
Ritchie-Matsumoto at the Ohio Department of
Rehabilitation and Correction, 614-752-1262, or Steve
Morrison, program manager, National Law Enforcement
and Corrections Technology Center Southeast, 800-292-
4385.

Product Evaluations: DKL LifeGuard and Myotron
"Checkmate"

From time to time, the National Institute of Justice's
(NIJ's) Office of Science and Technology or its satellite
facilities are requested to conduct product testing to
determine if a manufacturer's claims are accurate or to
determine if the product/technology is applicable for law
enforcement, corrections, or forensics use. If a request is
deemed appropriate by NIJ, the product is tested by independent
laboratories. In these two situations, Sandia National 
Laboratories conducted tests pursuant to agreements with
NIJ. The findings are made available to the criminal justice
community. The following summaries represent the results
of two such evaluations, one regarding the DKL LifeGuard
human presence detector and the other the Myotron
"Checkmate" Pulse Weapon.

DKL LifeGuard

At the request of the U.S. Department of Energy, Sandia
National Laboratories recently conducted an evaluation of
the LifeGuard Model 2, a device manufactured by
DielectroKinetic Laboratories, LLC (DKL) and marketed
as a human presence detector and tracker. In its evaluation
report, titled Double-Blind Evaluation of the DKL
LifeGuard Model 2, Sandia concluded that "the results
were that the device [LifeGuard Model 2] failed to meet its
published specifications and its performance was no better
than random chance."

As part of the evaluation, a DKL representative operated
the device, attempting to determine the location of a "test
target" (human individual) who was randomly hidden
within one of five shipping containers. This evaluation was
double-blind, with neither the DKL representative nor the
Sandia investigators aware of which container the test
target was hidden in until after the exercise. Twenty-five
trials were performed during the double-blind portion of the
evaluation with the DKL representative successfully
selecting the correct container 6 out of 25 trials. According
to the Sandia report, this is equivalent to guessing, as "the
operator had a one-in-five probability of success by chance
alone."

Additional information about the evaluation of the DKL
LifeGuard Model 2 can be found on the World Wide Web
at www.sandia.gov/media/hudet.html or by contacting
Thomas Coty of the National Institute of Justice at 202-
514-7683 or at cotyt@ojp.usdoj.gov. The results of this
Department of Energy-sponsored test are provided for
informational purposes and do not necessarily reflect the
views of the National Institute of Justice.

Myotron "Checkmate"

The Myotron "Checkmate" Pulse Weapon, manufactured
by Arianne International and marketed as a less-than-lethal
personal protection device, was recently evaluated by
Sandia National Laboratories to determine the accuracy of
manufacturer claims. There are several discrepancies between the manufacturer's claims and the test results.

o The manufacturer states that the Myotron "Checkmate" is
more than 10 times as powerful as the average stun gun.
Although testing of a purchased model revealed that the
product has one of the highest electrical outputs for stun
guns, it is not more than 10 times the power of the
"average" stun gun.

o The manufacturer claims that the device can deliver more
than 10,000 bursts from the powerpack, but testing indicates
that 4,000 bursts are more likely.

o The manufacturer reports that the device "intercepts and
neutralizes brain waves from the motor cortex (voluntary
muscle control) and hypothalamic (aggression) regions of
the brain," which produces no side effects. Although
neither animal nor human subject testing was conducted,
testing did consist of an electrical engineering evaluation, a
general evaluation by industrial hygiene/toxicology
personnel, and an overall high-level systems analysis by
Sandia National Laboratories. Results indicate no evidence
to support this claim.

If you would like more information regarding the Myotron
"Checkmate" Pulse Weapon test results, contact James
Williams, NIJ Program Manager, at 202-305-9078 or at
williamj@ojp.usdoj.gov.

Have Internet access?
NLECTC Is Online
Try our Web site, JUSTNET, for:

o Information on new technologies, equipment, and other
products and services available to law enforcement,
corrections, and the criminal justice communities, including
access to a database of over 4,000 available products and
technologies.

o Breaking News from printed media, the Internet,
individual facilities of the NLECTC system, and the
Nation's Capital.

o Publications from NIJ and NLECTC that you can view or
download to your system.

o Interactive Topic Boards that allow you to post questions
and exchange information with hundreds of professionals in
their specialty areas.

o Frequently Asked Questions that offer detailed
information based on thousands of calls to our information
specialists.

o Calendar of Events that lists the latest upcoming
meetings, seminars, and training.

o Links to other important law enforcement and corrections
Web sites.

For help in establishing an Internet connection, linking to
JUSTNET, or finding needed technology and product
information, call the NLECTC Information Hotline at 800-
248-2742.

To receive future issues of the TechBeat newsletter at no
charge, call 800-248-2742 or e-mail asknlectc@nlectc.org.

New Publications/Videos

The following publications are available from the National
Law Enforcement and Corrections Technology Center-
National.

TechBeat, Spring 1998. This issue of TechBeat features the
use of telemedicine in corrections facilities, facial
recognition technology, and thermal-imaging night vision
devices.

TechBeat, Winter 1998. Articles in this issue of TechBeat
feature the U.S. Department of Defense excess equipment
program, computerized crime mapping, and the ALERT
police car.

The National Institute of Justice and Advances in Forensic
Science and Technology. This bulletin presents information
on recent advances in forensic science technology and
evidence collection funded by the National Institute of
Justice, including DNA identification, latent fingerprints,
and questioned document examination.

Police Body Armor Consumer Product List Update Fall
1997. This consumer product list (CPL) identifies models
of armor that were tested and found to comply with the NIJ
standard. CPLs are updated to include new models that
have passed the test. This edition is an update to the Spring
1994 edition of the CPL; both documents are required to
have a complete listing of NIJ-approved models.

Equipment Performance Report: 1997 Evaluation of
Replacement Brake Pads for Police Patrol Vehicles. This
report provides complete results of the May 1997
comprehensive evaluation of replacement brake pads for
police patrol vehicles. The report contains a large amount
of data generated throughout the evaluation, which was
conducted under a variety of test conditions.

Equipment Performance Report: 1998 Model Year Patrol
Vehicle Testing. This report provides complete data on the
1998 Michigan State Police patrol vehicle testing.

The following publications will be available soon:

Survey of Commercially Available Explosives Detection
Technologies and Equipment. This document provides a
comprehensive overview of currently available explosives
detection methods and technologies. It is intended to
inform law enforcement agencies about relevant aspects of
explosives detection and provide them with a basis for
making procurement decisions.

Selection and Application Guide to Police Body Armor.
While body armor is a household word in the law
enforcement community, questions about its selection and
use are frequently asked. This guide responds to commonly
expressed concerns and provides information to help
determine the level of protection required by officers.
Excellent companion publication to Police Body Armor
Consumer Product List Update Fall 1997.

Positional Asphyxia Videotape. This informational
videotape, targeted to the many smaller county municipal
jail facilities throughout the United States, details actions to
prevent in-custody deaths related to positional asphyxia. It
highlights the correct procedures to use when restraining a
violent prisoner and safety precautions to follow to prevent
medical problems.

To obtain any of the above publications or videotapes or to
receive additional copies of the TechBeat newsletter, write
NLECTC, P.O. Box 1160, Rockville, MD 20849-1160;
telephone 800-248-2742. Publications can also be
downloaded from JUSTNET at http://www.nlectc.org.

First Technology Institute for Corrections

As part of a determined effort to promote effective and
affordable technology in support of corrections, the
National Institute of Justice (NIJ) will sponsor a
Technology Institute for Corrections this fall in
Washington, D.C.

Space is limited to 24 mid-level corrections practitioners
who regularly deal with technology issues in their
departments or agencies. The goals of the conference are:

o To provide participants the opportunity for continued
education on technologies applicable to corrections.

o To provide participants the opportunity to meet and
interact with other professionals and solve technological
problems.

o To provide NIJ the opportunity to improve its 
programs based upon participant experience, comments,
and recommendations.

The first NIJ Technology Institute, focused on law
enforcement, was held in August 1997. Its success led NIJ
to schedule another conference for law enforcement this
summer, and the first such Technology Institute for
Corrections this fall.

The Technology Institute for Corrections is scheduled for
October 25-30, 1998, in Washington, D.C. For information
on the conference or to obtain an application, contact
Ashley Mushett of Star Mountain, Inc., at 703-960-7000, or
access the National Law Enforcement and Corrections
Technology Center World Wide Web site, JUSTNET, at
www.nlectc.org.

We Got You Covered

The National Institute of Justice (NIJ), responding to
recommendations by the law enforcement and corrections
community, converted its Technology Assessment Program
Information Center (TAPIC) into the National Law
Enforcement and Corrections Technology Center
(NLECTC) system. Created in 1994 as a component of
NIJ's Office of Science and Technology, NLECTC's goal,
like that of NIJ, is to offer support, research findings, and
technological expertise to help State and local law
enforcement and corrections personnel safely and more
efficiently do their jobs.

NIJ's NLECTC system consists of facilities located across
the country that are colocated with an organization or
agency that specializes in one or more specific areas of
research and development. Although each of the NLECTC
facilities has a different technology focus, they work
together to form a seamless web of support, technology
development, and information to help the law enforcement
and corrections communities do their jobs more safely and
efficiently.

NLECTC-National
2277 Research Boulevard Rockville, MD 20850
Phone: 800-248-2742 Fax: 301-519-5149 E-mail:
asknlectc@nlectc.org
The National Center, located just 30 minutes north of
Washington, D.C., is the hub of the NLECTC system. It
provides information and referral services to anyone with a
question about law enforcement and corrections equipment
or technology. Its staff manages the voluntary equipment
standards and testing program that tests and verifies the
performance of body armor, metallic handcuffs, shotguns,
and police vehicles and tires. This office produces
consumer product lists of equipment meeting a specific set
of performance standards and also operates JUSTNET
(Justice Technology Information Network), an Internet
World Wide Web site that provides links to the entire
NLECTC system and other appropriate sites, as well as
assistance to those seeking information about equipment,
technology, or research findings.

NLECTC-Northeast
26 Electronic Parkway Rome, NY 13441
Phone: 888-338-0584 Fax: 315-330-4315 E-mail:
nlectc_ne@rl.af.mil
NLECTC-Northeast is located at the Rome Laboratories on
the grounds of the Griffiss Business and Technology Park
(formerly Griffiss Air Force Base). The center sponsors
research and development efforts into technologies that
address command, control, communications, computers,
and intelligence. This center draws on the expertise of Air
Force scientists and engineers in its development of
technologies that can be used to detect concealed weapons
on people, an effort that is expected to yield a stationary
device for use in buildings and handheld devices for patrol
officers. Other areas of research and development include
the creation of an automatic booking system, automated
firearms identification, multiband multifunction radios,
transportable communication systems, and a computerized
automatic language translation system.

NLECTC-Southeast
7325 Peppermill Parkway North Charleston, SC 29418-
7404
Phone: 800-292-4385 Fax: 803-207-7776 E-mail:
nlectc-se@nlectc-se.org
Two of the focus areas of NLECTC Southeast are
corrections technologies and surplus property acquisition
and distribution for law enforcement and corrections. The
center facilitates the acquisition and redistribution of
Federal surplus/excess property to State and local law
enforcement and corrections agencies. The equipment must
be used for law enforcement purposes only. Utilizing the
JUSTNET Web site, the center educates law enforcement
and corrections professionals about Federal surplus and
purchasing programs. The efforts of NLECTC-Southeast
have resulted in agencies receiving equipment they would
not ordinarily have access to or might not have been able to
afford due to budgetary constraints. This facility also
studies the needs of corrections agencies. It is guided in this
mission by a committee of criminal justice, law
enforcement, and corrections practitioners that identifies
requirements and sets priorities for research and
development. NLECTC Southeast is allied with the South
Carolina Research Authority (SCRA) and the Naval
Command, Control and Ocean Surveillance Center
In-Service Engineering, East Coast Division (NISE East).
NLECTC Southeast's other areas of focus include
information management and technologies, simulation
training, and designated special projects. 

NLECTC-Rocky Mountain
2050 East Iliff Avenue Denver, CO 80208
Phone: 800-416-8086 or 303-871-2522 in the Denver area 
Fax: 303-871-2500 E-mail: nlectc@du.edu
Located at the University of Denver, NLECTC-Rocky
Mountain focuses on communications interoperability and
the difficulties that often occur when different agencies and
jurisdictions try to communicate with one another. This
facility works with law enforcement agencies, private
industry, and national organizations to implement projects
that will identify and field test new technologies to help
solve the problem of interoperability. NLECTC-Rocky
Mountain also houses the newly created Crime Mapping
Technology Center, the training and practical application
arm of NIJ's Crime Mapping Research Center, which is
staffed by NIJ social scientists and scholars who utilize
crime analysis research to improve police field operations
and develop crime-mapping software for small, medium,
and large departments. The Rocky Mountain facility also
conducts research into ballistics and weapons technology,
as well as information systems. Sandia National Laboratory
has been designated as a satellite of NLECTC-Rocky
Mountain. The laboratory works in partnership with
NLECTC-Rocky Mountain and focuses on technology for
detecting and neutralizing explosive devices (Operation
Albuquerque).

NLECTC-West
c/o The Aerospace Corporation 2350 East El Segundo
Boulevard El Segundo, CA 90245-4691
Phone: 888-548-1618 Fax: 310-336-2227 E-mail:
nlectc@law-west.org
NLECTC-West is housed on the grounds of The Aerospace
Corporation, a nonprofit corporation that provides technical
oversight and engineering expertise to the Air Force and the
U.S. Government on space technology and space security
systems. NLECTC-West draws on The Aerospace
Corporation's depth of knowledge and scientific expertise
to offer law enforcement and corrections the ability to
analyze and enhance audio, video, and photographic
evidence. In cooperation with The Aerospace Corporation,
this NLECTC facility also has available an extensive array
of analytic instrumentation to aid in criminal investigations,
such as a scanning electron microscope, an x-ray
microscope, and a mass spectrometer, all of which are used
to process trace evidence. Its other areas of expertise
include computer architecture, data processing,
communications systems, and a recent effort to identify
technologies to stop fleeing vehicles.

Border Research and Technology Center (BRTC)
225 Broadway, Suite 740 San Diego, CA 92101
Phone: 888-656-BRTC (2782) Fax: 888-660-BRTC (2782)
E-mail: brtcchrisa@aol.com
The Border Research and Technology Center works with
the Immigration and Naturalization Service, the U.S.
Border Patrol, the U.S. Customs Service, the White House
Office of National Drug Control Policy, and the U.S.
Attorney for the Southern District of California to develop
strategies and technologies that will facilitate control of the
Southwest border. One of its most recognized
accomplishments has been the implementation of SENTRI
(Secured Electronic Network for Travelers' Rapid
Inspection). BRTC also works on joint ventures to identify
technologies that will stop fleeing vehicles and is currently
participating in a project to detect the heartbeats of people
concealed in vehicles or other containers.

Office of Law Enforcement Standards (OLES)
National Institute of Standards and Technology, Building
225, Room A323 Gaithersburg, MD 20899
Phone: 301-975-2757 Fax: 301-948-0978 E-mail:
oles@nist.gov
Supported by NIJ, the Office of Law Enforcement
Standards applies science and technology to the needs of
the criminal justice community. While its major objective
is to develop minimum performance standards for
equipment and technology, which NIJ promulgates as
voluntary national standards, OLES also undertakes studies
leading to the publication of technical reports and user
guides. Its areas of research include clothing,
communications systems, emergency equipment,
investigative aids, protective equipment, security systems,
vehicles, and weapons. It also develops measurement
methods for analytical techniques and standard reference
materials for forensic scientists and crime labs. Since the
program began in 1971, OLES has coordinated the
development of nearly 200 standards, user guides, and
advisory reports. Housed at the National Institute of
Standards and Technology, OLES works closely with
NLECTC National to conduct tests and to guarantee the
performance and quality of equipment used by police and
corrections.

Office of Law Enforcement Technology Commercialization
(OLETC)
Wheeling Jesuit University 316 Washington Avenue 
Wheeling, WV 26003
Phone: 888-306-5382 Fax: 304-243-2131 E-mail:
oletc@nttc.edu
Housed at Wheeling Jesuit University, the Office of Law
Enforcement Technology Commercialization provides one
of the NLECTC system's most important services, that of
bringing research and private industry together to put new
technologies into the hands of law enforcement and
corrections. OLETC actively solicits manufacturers to
commercialize technologies based on requirements
identified by law enforcement and corrections practitioners.
For example, it is currently seeking companies interested in
commercializing technologies already developed by the
U.S. Department of Energy's Los Alamos National
Laboratory, such as a device that lets police officers detect
crack houses from a distance, microwave and acoustic
sensors that detect the motion of people behind walls or
doors, and a nondetectable, nonscannable transmitter for
use in undercover situations. OLETC works with private
industry to support its efforts and help companies
streamline the commercialization process.

National Center for Forensic Science
University of Central Florida P.O. Box 162367 Orlando,
FL 32816-2367
Phone: 407-823-6469 Fax: 407-823-3162 E-mail:
natlctr@pegasus.cc.ucf.edu
The newest addition to the NLECTC system, this facility is
housed in the University of Central Florida and initially
will focus on arson and explosives research. Its mission is
to conduct fundamental research into the basic nature of
fire and explosion reactions, provide the support for
developing standard protocols for analyzing arson and
explosion debris, promote the use of electronic media to
access and exchange information about the forensic
sciences, and provide education opportunities to practicing
professionals and full-time students. This new facility will
draw on the experience and expertise of the university,
which houses a forensic science program with an active
research program, as well as the Institute of Simulation and
Training, which is currently exploring ways to simulate
explosive reactions to study various chemical processes.

From the Director

Law enforcement, courts, and corrections officials and
officers working in the field know how crucial technology
is to their day-to-day operations. In some circumstances,
having the right tool can even mean the difference between
life and death.

The technological revolution that has swept society as a
whole in recent years has also affected the criminal justice
system. Some technologies that not long ago seemed
advanced vests that can stop bullets, and electronic
monitoring of probationers today seem commonplace.
But the revolution continues apace, with ever more
spectacular advances now being made, or in the testing
stages, or on the drawing board.

As the research arm of the U.S. Department of Justice, the
National Institute of Justice (NIJ) has, since its founding 30
years ago, been in the forefront in sponsoring the
development, testing, and demonstration of technology to
improve the justice system. The development of DNA
testing standards, soft body armor, and improved
fingerprint evidence are some of the many areas in which
NIJ has played a leading role.

More recently, with strong support from the Administration
and the Congress, NIJ has accelerated the pace of its
efforts. Less-than-lethal technologies to minimize the use
of force, computerized mapping to pinpoint and analyze
crime patterns, concealed weapons detection to prevent
violence, methods of stopping fleeing vehicles to
apprehend suspects, and improvements in DNA
laboratories to aid in evidence testing all these
capabilities, and others, are now being explored by NIJ.
Their application can mean even greater transformations in
law enforcement operations.

TechBeat plays an important role as an essential link
communicating the latest information about these
developing technologies from the National Law
Enforcement and Corrections Technology Center. By
keeping law enforcement, courts, and corrections personnel
current about the tools they can use, the newsletter makes a
difference in controlling crime and ensuring justice.

Jeremy Travis
Director
National Institute of Justice 

The National Law Enforcement and Corrections
Technology Center is supported by Cooperative Agreement
#96-MU-MU-K011 awarded by the U.S. Department of
Justice, National Institute of Justice. Analyses of test results
do not represent product approval or endorsement by the
National Institute of Justice, U.S. Department of Justice;
the National Institute of Standards and Technology, U.S.
Department of Commerce; or Aspen Systems Corporation.
Points of view or opinions contained within this document
are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the
official position or policies of the U.S. Department of
Justice.

The National Institute of Justice is a component of the
Office of Justice Programs, which also includes the Bureau
of Justice Assistance, Bureau of Justice Statistics, Office of
Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, and Office
for Victims of Crime.

Sign Up To Receive Free Reports From the National
Criminal Justice Reference Service

In addition to funding the National Law Enforcement and
Corrections Technology Center, NIJ also supports the
National Criminal Justice Reference Service (NCJRS), an
international clearinghouse on crime and justice
information. NCJRS staff respond to reference questions,
provide referrals to other resources, distribute NIJ and other
Office of Justice Programs (OJP) documents, and maintain
a mailing list of over 45,000 registered users. If you are
interested in signing up for the NCJRS mailing list, you
may request a registration form using any of the following
methods:

Fax-on-Demand. Dial 800-851-3420, select option 1, then
option 2. The registration form is #1 on the document
index. The form will be faxed to you immediately.
Fax. You may fax your request for a registration form to
410-792-4358. You will receive a form promptly in the
mail.

E-mail. Send an e-mail to askncjrs@ncjrs.org and request a
registration form. It will be sent to you in the mail.
Write. Send a written request to NCJRS, Box 6000,
Rockville, MD 20849-6000.

Call. You may call an NCJRS information specialist and
request a registration form. The number is 800-851-3420.
As a registered user, you will receive the bimonthly NCJRS
Catalog, the quarterly NIJ Journal, and selected reports 
based on your criminal justice interests. For more
information about NIJ and NCJRS, visit their Web sites: 
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/nij and http://www.ncjrs.org.

TechBeat is the flagship publication of the National Law
Enforcement and Corrections Technology Center system.
Our goal is to keep you up to date on technologies that are
currently being developed by the NLECTC system, as well
as other research and development efforts within the
Federal Government and private industry. 

Your questions, comments, and story ideas are always
welcome. Contact: Rick Neimiller, managing editor,
through NLECTC-National, 800-248-2742, or e-mail to
asknlectc@nlectc.org. Writer and contributing editor, Lois
Pilant. Reproduction of any part of this publication is
encouraged by NLECTC unless otherwise indicated.