Group 2: Chairperson’s PresentationSlide 1 Chair’s Summary Asia Regional Technical Workshop on Megaports Initiative Bangkok, Thailand May 12-15, 2009 Group 2—Challenges to Scanning and Technical Solutions Julietta Seguis, Philippine Nuclear Research Institute

Group 2: Chairperson’s PresentationSlide 2 Objectives for Group 2 Describe technical interactions with SLD for benefit of potential partner countries Discuss partner country experiences Exchange lessons learned –Scanning, training, container jurisdiction, etc. Thoughts for potential partner countries on what to expect

Group 2: Chairperson’s PresentationSlide 3 Megaports Initial Engagement Stakeholders: Who takes ownership and how MI can engage successfully. –Contact MFA first, but work with interagency group –Establish who has the authority to take ownership of equipment and program –Plan for multiple stakeholders

Group 2: Chairperson’s PresentationSlide 4 Challenges / Lessons Learned How can DOE more effectively optimize placement of equipment? –Must study and analyze traffic flow with partner –Be prepared to spend several months on analysis –Depending on authority, plan for possible movement of equipment if port expands or contracts What were effective methods to reach out to truckers on safety of equipment? –Plan for an industry outreach program –Draft articles for trucking and other industry magazines –Create brochures to explain the detectors emit no radiation

Group 2: Chairperson’s PresentationSlide 5 Issues Related to Cost Is there a cost model for countries after the U.S. engagement ends? –There is no cost model as it is a function of the number of portals and use rate of spare parts Can participation in this program reduce insurance costs for shipping companies? –There have been examples of cost savings and increased business to ports who have advertised “port safety”

Group 2: Chairperson’s PresentationSlide 6 Issues Related to Percent scanning requirement Valuable lessons learned from 3 pilot projects under the SFI Initiative –Law has several exceptions –Law does not require data to be sent to U.S., however the review of data by DHS makes sense –There are capacity limits on data exchange, review, and analysis within DHS/CPBDHS will prioritize requirements based on threats –Countries will discuss reciprocal arrangements with U.S.

Group 2: Chairperson’s PresentationSlide 7 How to Combat Complacency within CAS management and staff Structure? Management has to lead by example and re-enforce need to remain vigilant Training is essential for both Management and staff operators Since there are so few “true” hits, practical exercises need to be created to “reward” diligent staff Staff turnover is expected, so a good “train the instructor” program would be beneficial for host country to retrain replacements Other successes should be promoted on the import side: –Hits on low level radiation that could effect public safety –Practical “rewards” for hard working staff