Slashdot Mirror


Program To Detect Smuggled Nuclear Bombs Stalls

Pickens writes "The NY Times reports that a program to detect plutonium or uranium in shipping containers has stalled because the United States has run out of helium 3, a crucial raw material needed to build the 1,300 to 1,400 machines to be deployed in ports around the world to thwart terrorists who might try to deliver a nuclear bomb to a big city by stashing it in one of the millions of containers that enter the United States every year. Helium 3 is an unusual form of the element that is formed when tritium, an ingredient of hydrogen bombs, decays — but the government mostly stopped making tritium in 1989 after accumulating a substantial stockpile of Helium 3 as a byproduct of maintaining nuclear weapons. 'I have not heard any explanation of why this was not entirely foreseeable,' says Representative Brad Miller, chairman of a House subcommittee that is investigating the problem. Helium 3 is not hazardous or even chemically reactive, and it is not the only material that can be used for neutron detection. The Homeland Security Department has older equipment that can look for radioactivity, but it does not differentiate well between bomb fuel and innocuous materials that naturally emit radiation like cat litter, ceramic tiles and bananas — and sounds false alarms more often. In a letter to President Obama, Miller called the shortage 'a national crisis' and said the price had jumped to $2,000 a liter from $100 in the last few years. With continuing concern that Al Qaida or other terrorists will try to smuggle a nuclear weapon into the United States, Congress has mandated that, by 2012, all containers bound for the US be inspected overseas."

54 of 224 comments (clear)

  1. There's plenty on the moon! by tjstork · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The moon is covered in helium 3. There, we have to have a manned lunar colony in order to be safe from terrorists!

    --
    This is my sig.
    1. Re:There's plenty on the moon! by Snarkalicious · · Score: 2, Funny

      Mom?

    2. Re:There's plenty on the moon! by yurtinus · · Score: 2, Funny

      I need a correlation between "moose knuckle" and "camel toe"

      Do you think you could deliver that in car-analogy form?

      --
      +1 Disagree
    3. Re:There's plenty on the moon! by gad_zuki! · · Score: 2, Funny

      >Do you think you could deliver that in car-analogy form?

      F450 vs a Miata.

  2. Foreseeable doesn't mean foreseen by Todd+Knarr · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Sure, this was foreseeable. But at the time nobody needed large quantities of this sort of radiation-detection gear, and nobody foresaw circumstances where we'd suddenly develop a huge demand for it. So when production was stopped, nobody saw the consequences as being any major problem.

    1. Re:Foreseeable doesn't mean foreseen by thermopile · · Score: 4, Informative

      There are other neutron detection technologies out there. Commercial nuclear power reactors have used other technologies for years.

      Boron-10 lined proportional counters, fission chambers, boron trifluoride, lithium doped glass ... there are lots of other options out there. None of them may have quite the same sensitivity, but you can just pack more sensors in to overcome sensitivity.

      To make a slashdot analogy, it's kind of like if all Debian developers caught swine flu and perished. Not a big deal, just move over to Ubuntu or Fedora.

      --

      "Diplomacy is something you do until you find a rock." --Richard Pound

    2. Re:Foreseeable doesn't mean foreseen by MichaelSmith · · Score: 2, Funny

      if all Debian developers caught swine flu and perished. Not a big deal, just move over to Ubuntu

      Ummm...

    3. Re:Foreseeable doesn't mean foreseen by wizardforce · · Score: 4, Informative

      If Debian just went poof, Ubuntu would still exist; it's just that the development cycle would likely take a serious hit. Either that or they'd pull a Linux Mint and completely rewrite everything to be based off of Fedora or something. Anyway to get this back on topic... The real problem with the Helium-3 shortage is Tritium which decays into Helium-3 over time. The government didn't anticipate needing truckloads of Helium-3 to detect nukes entering the country so not enough Tritium was stockpiled specifically to make Helium-3. We get most of the Helium-3 from our Hydrogen bomb stockpile which uses the Deuterium + Tritium fusion reaction. Since we didn't need much Helium-3 or Tritium, we didn't put the Li-6 + n => T + He4 reaction to good use but we can now. We also as the GP noted, have the option of using alternative detectors although their effectiveness may not be as high as Helium-3 based detectors. So in other words, it's an annoyance but not really the doom and gloom that the summary suggests.

      --
      Sigs are too short to say anything truly profound so read the above post instead.
  3. Wired covered this one in Aug 2000 by Zondar · · Score: 2, Informative

    http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/8.08/helium.html

  4. Re:Glad we got that covered. by MichaelSmith · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Will they inspect all trucks entering the US from Canada and Mexico?

  5. nuclear reactors to the rescue by wizardforce · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I'm guessing there's also a shortage of Tritium which decays into Helium-3 with a half-life of 12 years. If you have enough Tritium around and wait long enough, you'll have fresh Helium-3. You can make more Tritium by exposing Lithium-6 to a high neutron flux like that found in nuclear reactors. The neutron splits the Li6 as LI6 + n => T + He4. Russia might have quite a bit of it laying around owing to the size of their nuclear arsenal that we could buy.

    --
    Sigs are too short to say anything truly profound so read the above post instead.
  6. ...like lung imaging. by jeffb+(2.718) · · Score: 4, Informative

    Run 3He through a polarizer and feed it to someone in an MR scanner, and it lights up the airspace inside the lungs like a Christmas tree. Makes it dead easy to see ventilation defects (emphysema, etc.) and functional issues that are very difficult to spot with any other imaging technique. But Homeland Security Theater has jacked the price so high that even by medical-procedure standards it's prohibitively expensive.

    We've spent lots of hours designing and building a reclamation system so that we can collect the stuff, one MOUSE lungful at a time, and pump it into cylinders which we'll ship back to the supplier for purification. Yes, the amount a MOUSE breathes in a study is expensive enough to justify reclamation.

    We're also working on xenon imaging, which does some things almost as well as 3He, and some things better. It's still hideously expensive, but at least you can get it from the atmosphere, instead of painstakingly milking it from aging thermonukes.

    1. Re:...like lung imaging. by yurtinus · · Score: 3, Funny

      Alright, well you clearly sound like you know what you're talking about on this subject, so perhaps you could answer a few questions that are likely weighing heavily on many of our minds:

      1 - If I were to suck on a baloon filled with 3He, what would be the resulting effect on the frequency response of my vocal chords?
      2 - Same question as above, but replace "I" and "my" with "Mickey Mouse"
      3 - If I were to breathe reclaimed Mickey Mouse 3He, would I gain supernatural powers and large ears?
      4 - Have all those years on the steamboat given Mickey Mouse emphysema and does he have long to live?


      Inquiring minds must know!

      --
      +1 Disagree
    2. Re:...like lung imaging. by jeffb+(2.718) · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Alas, when you mix 3He with oxygen, it starts depolarizing, fast. We've got to mix it on the fly, right before it goes into the mouse. It's tricky, but we've gotten the hang of it. (Royal "we" here; I'm just a data plumber.)

    3. Re:...like lung imaging. by Obfuscant · · Score: 2, Informative
      Helium 3 is chemically indistinguishable from helium.

      However, the effect on the vocal cords is not chemical, it is physical. Because He is less dense than air, the vocal cords can vibrate faster in it than in air.

      Since He3 is less dense than He4, the effect will be slightly increased.

    4. Re:...like lung imaging. by jeffb+(2.718) · · Score: 5, Informative

      If I were to suck on a baloon filled with 3He, what would be the resulting effect on the frequency response of my vocal chords?

      Since it's about 25% less dense, it would make your voice go even higher than regular 4He. Especially if, right after you inhaled, we told you how much that lungful cost. (About $7k.)

      That's another way xenon is superior. It makes your voice go low, not high, as it's much denser than air -- and it gets you stoned, too.

  7. Re:Ineffective waste of money by fragMasterFlash · · Score: 2, Insightful

    If cocaine emitted a detectable neutron signature the war on drugs would have been won years ago, IMHO.

  8. Re:Ineffective waste of money by Snarkalicious · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The purpose of the border check system was never to actually stop the flow of drugs, silly. It was to drive out as many small players as possible, and concentrate the market into a few well funded/armed cartels. In this way, bribes come in at the director/secretary/senatorial level in a quiet and efficiant manner. Skipping the middle man (i.e. the border guard/local sheriff) on the bribery chain keeps my smack nice n' cheap.

  9. 0.4 Kevins by sexconker · · Score: 5, Funny

    How do you get 0.4 Kevins? Is this some sort of midget? It's dangerously close to 0 Kevins.

    My home town nearly went to zero Kevins back in 1978.

    It was a particularly cold winter, and we were already down to 3 Kevins (due to their low popularity at the time).

    Kevin Thomas had flown out to be with his son's family for a wedding and got stuck in Boston for a whole week due to the weather. 2 Kevins left.

    Kevin Lemmer was rushed to the hospital during my shift. I still remember the call from the EMTs as the ambulance was rushing toward us. "It's Lemmer. He's in bad shape. Drove right into the fucking ditch." We called the time of death at 6:15 PM.

    At 6:16, all eyes turned to room 2217. Kevin Spencer was 82 and on his death bed with leukemia. His family being Catholic, he had already been given his last rights. If he couldn't hold out until Kevin Thomas returned, we would be at zero Kevins. Sure, we had 4 perfectly healthy Calvins, but they're just not the same.

    It was 7:15 when Carla Brooks and her husband James burst through the main entrance. "She's not due for 2 weeks!", James exclaimed. As the staff bustled around getting the Brookses settled, they exchanged darting glances with each other. This was their first child, and they wanted to keep the baby's sex a secret. Of course, in a small town, secrets don't get kept. Nearly all of the hospital staff new that the child about to rip open Mrs. Brooks was indeed a boy.

    The delivery was routine, and Kevin Brooks was born healthy, if a tad underweight, at 10:52 PM. Kevin Spencer was pronounced dead at 10:54.

    It was, as they say, a close one. Kevin Thomas arrived two days later, the weather having finally cleared up. To this day, we still rib him about it.

    Cedar Falls is currently at 5 Kevins.

    1. Re:0.4 Kevins by confused+one · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I am sorry, but other than the midget crack in the first line, that was amusing and quite harmless.

    2. Re:0.4 Kevins by Jesus_666 · · Score: 5, Funny

      His family being Catholic, he had already been given his last rights.

      "You have the right to die silently. Anything you say or do can and will be used against you on Judgement Day. You have the right to an attorney, although the judge is already omniscient so it's fairly pointless. If you cannot afford an attorney on Judgment Day don't worry, neither can anyone else. If you understand these rights as they have been read to you then say 'amen'."

      --
      USE HOT GRITS WITH STATUE OF NATALIE PORTMAN (NAKED AND PETRIFIED)
    3. Re:0.4 Kevins by selven · · Score: 2, Funny

      Last writes? You're going to die and all you care about is your filesystem?

  10. Umm, what? by syncrotic · · Score: 5, Insightful

    There's seriously a program aimed at developing and deploying a fleet of nuclear bomb detectors at every port in the United States?

    What kind of ridiculous bullshit is this? Did someone at the DHS watch a few episodes of 24 to come up with this? It's movie-plot anti-terrorism at its absolute worst: imaging ridiculously specific scenarios and spending enormous amounts of money to guard against them.

    As if a terrorist organization resourceful enough to obtain a *nuclear fucking weapon* would somehow have difficulty bringing it into the country. This is a nation into which several metric tonnes of cocaine and thousands of illegal immigrants are successfully smuggled every year, and someone imagines that they'll be able to erect a perfect wall to keep a few kilograms of metal out of the country?

    What congressman's nephew is being paid to make these detectors?

    1. Re:Umm, what? by horza · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Indeed. It's not as though US law enforcement aren't being given insufficient tools for the job. Detention without charge, torture, no access to legal council for suspects, abductions of suspects from any country, mass surveillance without oversight, biometric controls at airports... Shouldn't the wholesale abandonment of liberty have bought you a bit of safety?

      Phillip.

    2. Re:Umm, what? by sjames · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Personal speedboat goes out a couple miles. Bomb is loaded onboard. Boat comes back in and is towed to the final destination hitched to an SUV. Just in case, also put a few kilos of cocaine onboard. That way if the police find it they'll take it to the impound yard in a populated area.

    3. Re:Umm, what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      god dammit, stop posting shit like this, terrorists read slashdot.

    4. Re:Umm, what? by nedlohs · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Or just ship it in a commercial container and detonate the thing in the port of Los Angeles, it's not like it's remote.

    5. Re:Umm, what? by DigiShaman · · Score: 2, Interesting

      It could be far far worse. These things could deployed in enough numbers to satisfy DHS, only to have a bomb still go off in the future.

      Two things will happen. The US will be locked up tighter than East Germany. Second, we will find ourselves in vigilant warfare conducted by our own citizens and ex-members of the armed forces. No nation on earth will stop the chaotic violence and bloodshed that will soon follow.

      --
      Life is not for the lazy.
    6. Re:Umm, what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      Actually it has.. major terrorist plots have been busted and prevented unneeded deaths because of these new tools.

      I, for one am glad these tools are at their disposal. Its kept us safe, and that's all I care about. Even the Messiah Obama hasn't rescinded any of them so he knows they are worth the price.

    7. Re:Umm, what? by Falconhell · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Because it it totally impossible that a container could be added to a ship already at sea. I mean its not as if ships have cranes or anything.

    8. Re:Umm, what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      There's seriously a program aimed at developing and deploying a fleet of nuclear bomb detectors at every port in the United States?

      What kind of ridiculous bullshit is this? Did someone at the DHS watch a few episodes of 24 to come up with this? It's movie-plot anti-terrorism at its absolute worst: imaging ridiculously specific scenarios and spending enormous amounts of money to guard against them.

      As if a terrorist organization resourceful enough to obtain a *nuclear fucking weapon* would somehow have difficulty bringing it into the country. This is a nation into which several metric tonnes of cocaine and thousands of illegal immigrants are successfully smuggled every year, and someone imagines that they'll be able to erect a perfect wall to keep a few kilograms of metal out of the country?

      What congressman's nephew is being paid to make these detectors?

      Hey! I know you! You're the same guy who'll be bitching and screaming at the top of his lungs about how the government should have known a nuclear terrorist attack was in the works and how they should have done something to stop it.

    9. Re:Umm, what? by stinkytoe · · Score: 4, Funny

      That kinda reminds me of what I heard Tom Clancy say in an interview once, and I am paraphrasing. When asked how one could bring a nuclear bomb into the states he said: "Just wrap it in cocaine and bring it through the Port if Miami."

    10. Re:Umm, what? by syncrotic · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Actually, you don't. Know me, I mean.

    11. Re:Umm, what? by radtea · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Because it's impossible to load a bomb onto a ship while it is at sea.

      And a nuclear bomb is so big it can't fit into a modest-sized sailboat of the kind that people have been known to sail around the world in. There are thousands upon thousands of such boats, and the rate of inspection of cargo is pretty much nil. So unless you're going to stop everyone crusing along your coasts and inspect them, no matter how small the boat, you're going to have to live with the risk that nuclear weapons will be delivered to your shores.

      I'm sure the Organs of the State would love to institute a program of random coastal inspection. After all, harrassing innocent sailors is the only way to keep America safe, and the revenue they could generate from seizing yachts would no-doubt keep them in coke and hookers for a long, long time.

      --
      Blasphemy is a human right. Blasphemophobia kills.
  11. welcome to science in the US by Goldsmith · · Score: 2, Insightful

    It seems we know how to do just about anything these days, but lack the ability to actually get it done

  12. Re:Ineffective waste of money by sexconker · · Score: 3, Informative

    Dogs are better at finding drugs than any scanner is at finding nuclear material.

    Less expensive too.
    Less training involved, too.
    Less maintenance, too.
    Cuter, too.

    The war on drugs isn't meant to be "won", it is meant to be perpetually exacerbated to ensure the continued employment and empowerment of those waging it.

  13. Another Crisis? by Vengance+Daemon · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Is there anything going on in the U.S. today that is NOT a "national crisis"? We need a break.

    1. Re:Another Crisis? by GrumblyStuff · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It's the consequence of giving anyone the position to make announcements and proclamations. Even without the government, night news would still be on at 6 to tell you that something IN YOUR HOME or AT SCHOOL or ON THE JOB can kill you!!!

    2. Re:Another Crisis? by GrumblyStuff · · Score: 2, Insightful

      feck

      on at 6 to tell you at 11.

  14. another way to make tritium by jfb2252 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    International Committee on Future Accelerators Beam Dynamics section newsletter abstract under the URL.

    While the emphasis in the six articles is on transmutation of nuclear waste and accelerator driven nuclear power plants, the same accelerators can generate neutrons to breed tritium from lithium. The fusion demonstration ITER will have blanket with lithium to demonstrate breeding since its fuel is a deuterium-tritium mixture.

    It would be lovely for the US accelerator community if the US DHS forked over $1.5B for a system to breed tritium and, in its spare time, transmute long lived waste isotopes so used fuel rods would decay to radiation levels below that of natural uranium ore within one thousand instead of one hundred thousand years.

    http://www-bd.fnal.gov/icfabd/Newsletter49.pdf

    The theme is "Accelerator Driven Sub-Critical Assemblies (ADS) and its challenge to accelerators." This is a topic that could have a deep impact on the future of our society. As we all know, developing clean energy and protecting the environment are two top priorities in countries around the world. ADS is an accelerator-based technology that may provide a viable solution to these major problems. Jiuqing collected 6 excellent articles in the theme section. They give a comprehensive review of this important accelerator field, including valuable lessons learned from the past.

    1. Re:another way to make tritium by confused+one · · Score: 2, Funny

      Another method would be to fund a few prototype generation IV power plants. A gas-cooled fast reactor should fit the bill nicely.

  15. Re:Hmmm... by sexconker · · Score: 2, Funny

    Goin' great Last Available Usern.
    (Or should I say - "USAs all be an evil rat"?)

    Your weapon... fun-sized... shipment of ura... American candy... will be arriving shortly.

  16. CANDU reactors by debrain · · Score: 4, Informative

    A byproduct of CANDU reactors is Helium-3.

    I'm not the first to note this, evidently.

  17. Re:Is there plenty in Russia? by retchdog · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Apparently it is, if you're in the military and the "things" you are speaking out against are the United States and/or its armed forces. Uniform Code of Military Justice, article 134: "GENERAL ARTICLE: Though not specifically mentioned in this chapter, all disorders and neglects to the prejudice of good order and discipline in the armed forces, all conduct of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces, and crimes and offenses not capital, of which persons subject to this chapter may be guilty, shall be taken cognizance of by a general, special , or summary court-martial, according to the nature and degree of the offense, and shall be punished at the discretion of that court."

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_article_(military_law)

    Admittedly that's the final "catch all" article intended to close the loopholes above. Still, by the letter of the law...

    --
    "They were pure niggers." – Noam Chomsky
  18. It stalled because... by travisco_nabisco · · Score: 3, Funny

    I probably stalled because it is near impossible to tell the difference between a smuggled nuclear bomb and a TSA approved nuclear bomb in check luggage.

  19. Hey Wicked Cool! by gbutler69 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I just finished working on this project a year ago. I worked as a sub-contractor for Thermo-Fisher Scientific, one of the prime contractors, to DNDO, DHS, and CBP. It was an interesting project. My team was responsible for developing the command and control software for these systems. Had a lot of ups and downs. The technology works fairly well. We did A LOT of testing of the system in both laboratory and field conditions in order to validate the software. Got to travel to great and wonderous places like Nevada Test Site, Southampton, UK, and Antwerp, Belgium. Who'd a thought something like this would put a monkey in the works?

    Funny anecdote: When we installed the system in Southampton, UK, the British and Eurpoean Union representatives were most interest in if it could detect "Cigarettes"? Man, they wanna make sure they collect that tax on your smokes!

    --
    Over-the-top Response Guy! Giving "Over-the-Top Responses" since 1970.
    1. Re:Hey Wicked Cool! by u38cg · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Well, year on year, cigarettes kill more people than nukes. Amazing, really, and it's just a plant.

      --
      [FUCK BETA]
  20. Why bring a Nuke into the Country? by deboli · · Score: 3, Insightful

    You don't need to land the bomb to cause lots of damage. Anyone resourceful enough to get hold of a nuclear bomb will probably know about the detection system and the best risk avoidance is to detonate it before unloading. You could detonate it below the waterline (in the ship) or above ground (hoisted off deck by the port crane) to be as destructive as possible. No detection possible unless you scan cargo 20km offshore.

  21. Re:Is there plenty in Russia? by Falconhell · · Score: 2, Insightful

    ROFLMAO, come on mods, he cant be serious.

    No one is THAT stupid surely.

    Then again whenever someone writes Barrack "Hussein" Obama you just never know if they are real paranoid right wing nutjobs, or just satirising them.

    Words cannot describe how much I enjoy their terrified thrashing around now a decent intelligent black man is President. Fun times.

  22. Re:Concern? Who's concerned? by cusco · · Score: 2, Informative

    Pretty much anyone who knows the state of the former Soviet stockpile. Victor Bout at one point was said to have one for sale for $40 million. No one is sure where it went, but since Valerie Plame and Brewster Jennings hadn't yet been exposed it likely ended up in the US stockpile.

    --
    "Think about how stupid the average person is. Now, realise that half of them are dumber than that." - George Carlin
  23. Re:Glad we got that covered. by gbutler69 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Yes. That's the idea. These things can scan traffic for nuclear materials as you drive through at 30 mph.

    --
    Over-the-top Response Guy! Giving "Over-the-Top Responses" since 1970.
  24. Re:Serious physics question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    Perhaps D + D -> He-3 + n. There is no He-4 intermediate (a misconception). It is impossible for He-4 to be formed as D + D -> He-4, as there is only one particle on the right and this would violate either conservation of energy or momentum. In the "too much energy" interpretation you cite, it means that the fusion reaction releases 10's of MeV of energy into the fusion products' kinetic energies, but there is only one product (He-4), and it is at rest in one inertial frame, so there is no kinetic energy - a contradiction. So the reaction is not possible.

    (It is also relevant that nuclei have very limited internal structure, so it is not feasible for this extra energy to go into sub-nuclear motion. If you throw a macroscopic object into a wall, and it stops, conservation of energy is not violated, because it goes into other degrees of freedom (the movement of constituent atoms, that is heat). This does not work with nuclei, hence the counter-intuitive physics.)

    He-4 and He-3 are both stable. He-4 does not decay into He-3.

  25. Sorry, I ate some of it. by mudshark · · Score: 2, Funny

    Back in the 1960s and 70s, a small factory made glow-in-the-dark clock and watch faces across the street from the bakery and kitchens for my school district. They used a paint which released tritium as it dried, and their fume hoods vented out the roof (why not? plenty of air circulation!) and the prevailing breezes carried a nice dose of alpha particles across the street on most days to settle out on the food that we were served. When somebody somewhere was tipped off that this arrangement may not have been completely kosher, some local muckrakers and a couple of curious scientists showed up with a Geiger counter. One dish in particular, sunshine cake, was damn hot and legend has it that the name alludes to its brightness....I blame all my societal maladjustment on this lapse in food safety.

    Kids, don't trust the food just because the lady with the hairnet says it's OK. Get it checked out by one of the guys in the hazmat suits.

    --
    In other news, astrophysicists have announced that they now know what all that dark matter is: it's stupidity.
  26. Waste Fraud and Abuse by anorlunda · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The NYT article says that the current demand for H3 is 65,000 liters per year. WTF!!!

    I can't believe that so much H3 is needed for new screening machines. It must be true that the machines are leaking the H3 or contaminating it and thus needing to replenish it all the time.

    If it were private industry rather than Homeland Security that wanted the screening function, the regulators would force them to refine the design until they need only one liter or less per machine, and then to protect the asset so that it never leaks or gets contaminated. One liter per ten years per screening machine sounds like a more reasonable quota.

    I attribute this crisis to the inability of government to regulate itself.

    By the way, I live on my sailboat and cruise internationally. I know that hundreds of thousands of recreational boats enter the USA every year. Every one of them is capable of carrying one or more nuclear warheads. Are these boats screened? No. In many cases they just call a 800 number to report their entry.