preventing the use of explosives and weapons, and improved security overall through a deterrent effect. The benefits will be to society in general, although in the case of airline passengers each of these may be considered to directly benefit, as well as individual benefits in terms of increased passenger confidence [4]. In any case, each type of security screening application should be specifically evaluated in terms of the purpose and the environment within which the practice is to be applied. An example of detailed guidance on the justification process for security screening is given in Ref. [44], and includes the following steps: Defining the need; Evaluating the options, including effectiveness and their limitations; Evaluating privacy concerns; Assessing the radiation risk from the technologies; Assessing the potential net benefit from implementation of the technologies; Assessing the cost and availability of resources (regulatory, operational and training), and the viability of sustainable implementation. The justification process should involve all relevant government authorities, including but not limited to, those authorities with responsibility for security, border control, consumer groups and the regulatory body. For the types of practices where a large number of people might be affected, such as the security screening of airline passengers, the government should carefully consider the need for extensive public consultation. In the case of the security screening of airline passengers, the government should also consider liaising with counterparts in States in view of the international dimension of air travel. The benefits from some of these types of practice could be substantial. Nevertheless, proposals to introduce them into a State should be scrutinized very carefully by the government. When a particular Category 2 non-medical human imaging practice has been considered as justified for a given security purpose within a specified environment, the justification decision should be reviewed on a regular basis, as technologies and threat evaluations constantly change. Detection of concealed objects for anti-smuggling purposes This Category 2 practice relates to the use of inspection devices to detect objects that have been deliberately concealed on or in a person because either it is illegal to possess the objects or to avoid paying duties or taxes on the objects. The objects that might be under consideration may differ from State to State, but could include drugs and gemstones. As noted in para. 3.86, in the justification process for drug
preventing the use of explosives and weapons, and improved security overall through a deterrent effect. The benefits will be to society in general, although in the case of airline passengers each of these may be considered to directly benefit, as well as individual benefits in terms of increased passenger confidence [4]. In any case, each type of security screening application should be specifically evaluated in terms of the purpose and the environment within which the practice is to be applied. An example of detailed guidance on the justification process for security screening is given in Ref. [44], and includes the following steps: Defining the need; Evaluating the options, including effectiveness and their limitations; Evaluating privacy concerns; Assessing the radiation risk from the technologies; Assessing the potential net benefit from implementation of the technologies; Assessing the cost and availability of resources (regulatory, operational and training), and the viability of sustainable implementation. The justification process should involve all relevant government authorities, including but not limited to, those authorities with responsibility for security, border control, consumer groups and the regulatory body. For the types of practices where a large number of people might be affected, such as the security screening of airline passengers, the government should carefully consider the need for extensive public consultation. In the case of the security screening of airline passengers, the government should also consider liaising with counterparts in States in view of the international dimension of air travel. The benefits from some of these types of practice could be substantial. Nevertheless, proposals to introduce them into a State should be scrutinized very carefully by the government. When a particular Category 2 non-medical human imaging practice has been considered as justified for a given security purpose within a specified environment, the justification decision should be reviewed on a regular basis, as technologies and threat evaluations constantly change. Detection of concealed objects for anti-smuggling purposes This Category 2 practice relates to the use of inspection devices to detect objects that have been deliberately concealed on or in a person because either it is illegal to possess the objects or to avoid paying duties or taxes on the objects. The objects that might be under consideration may differ from State to State, but could include drugs and gemstones. As noted in para. 3.86, in the justification process for drug