2000 Counterdrug Research and Development Blueprint Update

Appendix E: Technology Transfer Program

The fiscal year 1998 appropriation for the ONDCP directed CTAC to establish a $13,000,000 Counterdrug Technology Transfer Pilot Program (TTP). The program was continued in fiscal year 1999 ($13,000,000) and fiscal year 2000 ($13,250,000).

The Technology Transfer Program was established to provide technologies developed with federal funding directly to State and local law enforcement agencies that may otherwise be unable to benefit from the developments due to limited budgets or lack of technological expertise. This program matches existing technology systems with state or local law enforcement agencies in need of those technologies and funds the technology transfer. Priority is given to identifying candidates for transfer in the currently designated HIDTAs and CTAC also weighs the ability and willingness of potential recipients to share in the costs of new technology, either through in-kind or direct contributions. The technology areas available for transfer include information technology and analytical tools, communications, tracking and surveillance, and drug detection devices.

The enabling legislation which is provided in Appendix A, Applicable Legislation, directed CTAC to submit a performance evaluation of the Technology Transfer Program and a strategic plan for countrywide deployment of technology. This section of the Blueprint Update provides excerpts from that report which was submitted to Congress on September 20, 1999.

Vision of the Technology Transfer Program

The vision of the TTP is to enhance the capabilities of State and local law enforcement agencies (LEAs) by transferring and leveraging successful prior investments in technologies developed for the Federal LEAs. The TTP provides State and local LEAs with state-of-the-art, affordable, easily integrated and maintained technologies whose operational utility has been established by the Federal LEAs.

Federal Research and Development Program Basis of the Technology Transfer Program

Since 1991, CTAC has provided oversight and coordination for a national counterdrug law enforcement research and development (R&D) program. The goal is to advance the technological capabilities of Federal drug control agencies with law enforcement responsibility. For several years, the Federal law enforcement agencies have been using technologies developed within the national program to investigate drug-related crime and to apprehend drug traffickers.

Based upon the successful development, operational deployment and use by Federal LEAs, these technologies were considered ready for transfer to State and local LEAs across the country. The TTP is not a grant program in the sense that an agency can apply only for a system or device offered by the Program. Instead, technologies and training are provided directly to the State and local law enforcement agencies.

Basic Assumption of the TTP

The assumption is that Federal, State, and local LEAs all need advanced technologies to conduct their drug-related criminal investigations, but to different scale and complexity. The Federal LEAs will employ the technologies to carry out complex, large-scale drug-related criminal investigations while the State and local LEAs will need the identical technologies but usually on a smaller scale for their drug-related criminal investigations and daily operations. Additionally, to ensure that drug crime task forces receive maximum benefit from the more sophisticated information sharing technologies, special emphasis has been placed on providing technology to LEAs within High Intensity Drug Trafficking Areas (HIDTA).

Successes of the TTP During its First Eighteen Months

The $26,000,000 appropriated over the past two years has made possible the delivery of 892 pieces of equipment to 631 State and local law enforcement agencies. These transfers were sufficient to satisfy the first, second, or third priority request of these agencies.

To ensure the greatest benefit to the LEAs and to assist in the proper use and deployment of the technologies, hands-on training and limited maintenance support are provided to all recipients. The comments from the recipient agencies indicate that the technologies provided by the program have resulted in improved operational capabilities that otherwise would not have been possible because of limited budgets or lack of technical expertise.

Program Evaluation

Program Administration and Management

The U.S. Army Electronic Proving Ground (EPG), Fort Huachuca, Arizona, is the technical and contracting agent responsible for the day-to-day management of the program. They have employed an administrative process consisting of program management, engineering analysis, acquisition, logistics, and awareness efforts, including informative publications and establishment of an Internet Web site to execute the program. Figure 1 provides a break down of the financial management accounts set up by EPG.

The pie chart provides the distribution of the $26,000,000: technologies ($21,770,000 which includes the costs associated with procuring 892 systems and providing them to 631 agencies since the program started), administration ($1,400,000 which includes all daily administrative and program management functions, extensive records management, and support to the recipients); outreach efforts ($950,000 which includes all regional one-day workshops and meetings to demonstrate the technologies to LEAs); LEA training ($1,400,000 which includes the training sessions for the recipients when they first receive equipment and vendor support at the LEA location); and evaluation ($480,000 which includes follow up support, consultant services, and preparation of the evaluation report).

Figure 1. DISTRIBUTION OF PROGRAM COSTS

Role of the Regional Law Enforcement Experts

The TTP has secured the support of active-duty, nationally recognized, senior police chiefs and sheriffs to serve as regional law enforcement experts. They review the applications for equipment from agencies within their respective regions, assist in evaluating the program, and provide advice on the operational utility of the candidate technologies. They receive and review every application. Figure 2 lists the names and shows the locations of the twelve regional experts.

To support the evaluation, the regional experts provide a subjective judgment as to whether:

• the technologies requested will improve the operational capabilities of the requesting department or organization,
  
  
• the organization has the requisite infrastructure to integrate the technology into its daily operations, and
  
  
• the equipment is too complex for the organization.

Five former law enforcement officials serve as consultants to support the TTP. These consultants interface directly with receiving agencies on a regular basis to ensure the smooth insertion of technology is achieved including follow up and evaluation of the deployed technologies. In addition, these consultants assist the regional experts as required and provide advice regarding candidate technologies and their potential for use by law enforcement agencies.

Figure 2. REGIONAL LEA EXPERTS, CTAC LEA MEETINGS, WORKSHOPS AND CONFERENCES

Basis of the Performance Evaluation

Each recipient completes 60, 180 and 270-day evaluations. The evaluation forms request specific objective, quantifiable comments on the utility, number of cases, specific operational experiences with the technology, and subjective comments on the strengths and weaknesses and suggestions to improve the program. The analyses of the information submitted forms the basis for evaluating the program.

Commentary from the Evaluation Reports

The evaluation reports indicate that the technologies have been readily integrated into the operations of these State and local agencies. The technologies have contributed to improved counterdrug operations. In general, the result has been an increase in drug-related arrests with a dramatic improvement in officer safety at each agency.

Because most police departments do not publicly disclose information concerning technological capabilities, disclosure of specific details of the successes attributed to the use of any single device must be limited. The departments are concerned that the release of detailed operational employment information will result in increased countermeasures on the part of the criminals, especially for wiretap and conspiracy cases.

Excerpts of the Evaluation Reviews for Three of the Systems

• VoiceBox: The VoiceBox system is a Title III telephone and cellular phone monitoring and recording system. It has been instrumental in conducting investigations of major organized crime groups and cartels. This system allows officers to monitor up to 12 telephone lines simultaneously. Agencies receiving this system comment about its ability to save time, reduce paper work, and work more efficiently while conducting wire intercepts. Significant results: Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department, Monterey Park, California has conducted 14,000 wire intercepts, 4 cases, with 35 targets - results are pending; Oklahoma State Bureau of Narcotics, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma has 11 defendants from their first case and presently are conducting a multi-state wire intercept conspiracy case investigation involving a major cartel. Rockland County Narcotics Task Force, New York City, New York has also had much success in targeting organized crime. Rockland County is thrilled with the efficiency of the system. Before receiving VoiceBox, a two-telephone line intercept conducted over a two-month period would overload the surveillance team resulting in a mountain of paperwork piling high above a desk. With VoiceBox, the team can fit all information related to a six-telephone line intercept over a one-month period on one recordable compact disk.
  
  
• Mini-Buster Contraband Detector: The Mini-Buster has been one of our most successful technology transfers. This device saves time and work-hours for field officers involved in narcotic search warrants and portal system check locations (i.e., border crossings, truck checkpoints and highway interdiction efforts.) It has taken the guesswork out of where and what to search. There were many comments about its ability to save time and to help eliminate locations that were thought to contain narcotics. Its success in locating hidden and false compartments containing large amounts of narcotics is phenomenal. Significant results: Imperial County Narcotics Task Force, El Centro, California, over 200 pounds of marijuana concealed in car gas tanks; Kansas City, Kansas Police Department, over 600 pounds of marijuana concealed in truck tires.
  
  
• Thermal Imager: This long-range night vision device has been praised by many LEAs in rural areas as their most effective counterdrug mission technology tool. Many marijuana growth sites and methamphetamine labs operating at night were located and dismantled. The device also assisted in surveillance operations on thefts of anhydrous ammonia (used in methamphetamine production) from farmers and farm suppliers. The equipment is attributed to have reduced work-hours and created a large margin of safety for agency personnel. The equipment helps in identifying sites and allows agencies to do long term covert surveillance with a safety for field personnel that they have never had before. Significant results: Reno, Nevada, Washoe County Sheriff's Office used a thermal imager to spot three suspects trying to flee a methamphetamine lab at night; St. Joseph, Missouri, Buchanan County Drug Strike Force used the system in the arrest of several narcotics suspects and a seizure of over $150,000 of methamphetamine and marijuana; Muscatine, Iowa Police Department, 8 seizures of methamphetamine.

TTP Technologies

The TTP embarked on a concerted effort to match the proper technologies to State and local agencies with drug-related crime according to the size and type of the force. It was found that the size of the jurisdiction was the predominant factor in the mix of technologies requested rather than type of department. Technologies currently offered by the program are listed in Table 1.

The delivery distribution by population size is shown in Figure 3 where it can be seen that seventy-six percent of deliveries went to populations of 500,000 or less. The predominant mix of technologies requested and provided to the police departments and sheriffs offices in the smaller jurisdictions was composed of drugwipes, body worn, mini-buster kits, and thermal imagers. Similarly, for the distribution of deliveries by agency type shown in Figure 4, over seventy-five percent of the deliveries (and requests) were allocated to police departments and sheriffs offices. The concentration of requests for the more complex systems (AG-SMS, VoiceBox, data locator, signcutter, video stabilization, and wireless interoperability) was received by task forces, police departments and sheriffs offices from the larger jurisdictions of 500,000 or more.

Those items used for case building in long-term investigations tend to be more complex and require comprehensive training, infrastructure and personnel resources for installation, operation, and maintenance. Consequently, these items were requested by and were distributed predominantly to the larger jurisdictions that possess the organic resources for continued life-cycle support. Distribution of the tactical, portable items to support the individual officer on the scene was achieved independent of population size because such technologies tend to be easy to operate and require minimum training for use by personnel. These items can be distributed in large numbers and are especially appropriate for smaller jurisdictions because they do not require installation or sophisticated infrastructures for their operation. Compared to the complex systems, simple devices typically have a lower life-cycle cost and no requirements for organizational support other than operation and maintenance which does not negatively affect the operating budgets of these organizations.

Over the past three years, CTAC has sponsored an outreach effort consisting of 18 regional one-day workshops and/or meetings to promote the use of advanced technology and increase LEA awareness of the Technology Transfer Program. The goal of the TTP is to demonstrate the impact and benefit of advanced systems to State and local law enforcement organizations. Some of these benefits include improved use of personnel resources, increased officer safety, better time efficiency, and reduced crime.

Table 1. LIST OF TECHNOLOGIES

Technology	Number	Cost
Tactical Tools to Support the Officer
Drugwipes - Surface residue drug test kit (in quantities of 100)	169	$169,000
Body Worn - Miniaturized covert audio device	81	$1,053,000
Mini-Buster/ Mini-Buster Probes - Portable contraband detection kit/ fiber optic probes associated with the portable contraband detection kit	153	$2,849,000
Small Look - Miniaturized video surveillance system	55	$1,100,000
Thermal Imager (Handheld, Lenses, and Vehicle)	320	$5,700,000
Vapor Tracer - Drug detection and identification instrument	50	$1,900,000
Complex Case Building Systems
AG-SMS - Air and/or ground covert vehicle tracking system	19	$2,280,000
VoiceBox - Telephone intercept monitoring and recording system for Title III investigation	10	$3,600,000
Data Locator - Client/server package that provides secure sharing of law enforcement data and intelligence	1	$325,000
Money Laundering Software - Software used to detect suspicious financial transactions	8	$240,000
Signcutter - Covert vehicle tracking system with mapping display	14	$1,540,000
TACSCAN - Voice identification system	5	$125,000
Video Stabilization - Video image enhancement system	6	$600,000
Wireless Interoperability - Interagency radio communications system	1	$289,000
Total	892	$21,770,000

The strategy for nationwide deployment of technology can be expressed in three thrusts derived over the past 18 months from the evaluation of the pilot program. These thrusts are:

support the officer on the street with high technology tools to increase effectiveness of personnel resources and improve officer safety by continuing the deployment of items, such as, thermal imagers and mini-busters, to those agencies requesting these technologies,

target specialized LEA groups and organizations that will benefit from the successful deployment of more complex, larger scale systems for communications interoperability and data mining applications in support of longer-term drug trafficking conspiracy investigations. This will be accomplished by refining the outreach effort and increasing the training provided to receiving agencies, and

assure that the optimum set of technologies is being offered. This effort will include the introduction of new technologies to the program, improvements to existing systems, and elimination of technologies that no longer meet the operational requirements or can be replaced with next-generation technology.

Figure 3. DELIVERIES BY POPULATION SIZE

Figure 4. DELIVERIES BY AGENCY TYPE