The Science and Technology Directorate (S&T) is the research-and-development arm of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security. It serves as the department’s chief science advisor and funds, develops, and tests technologies that help DHS components and first responders with missions such as border security, counterterrorism, cybersecurity, disaster response, and infrastructure protection. S&T manages a portfolio of projects and national labs, working with government, industry, and academia so that new tools are aligned with real operational needs.
The National Urban Security Technology Laboratory (NUSTL) is a federal laboratory located in Manhattan, New York, that is part of DHS’s Science and Technology Directorate. NUSTL tests and evaluates homeland security technologies—often side‑by‑side with first responders—to see how well they work in realistic conditions, and it produces product assessments and guidance (including through the SAVER program) to help law enforcement, fire services, and other emergency agencies select and use equipment. It is explicitly organized within DHS S&T and serves as a trusted technical resource for the national first responder community.
The System Assessment and Validation for Emergency Responders (SAVER) program is a DHS S&T/NUSTL program that independently evaluates commercially available emergency‑response equipment. Since 2004 it has produced over 1,100 publications (market surveys, assessment reports, technotes, guides, etc.) that describe capabilities, limitations, and relevant standards so responders and purchasing officials can make better procurement decisions. SAVER results are used by federal, state, local, and tribal public‑safety agencies and other members of the homeland security enterprise who are selecting or justifying equipment purchases.
An unmanned ground vehicle (UGV) is a robot that moves on the ground—using wheels, tracks, or legs—without a person riding on it. It is either driven remotely by an operator or navigates partly/fully on its own, and typically carries cameras, sensors, and sometimes a manipulator arm to inspect, lift, or move objects in hazardous areas. In the article’s context, these UGVs were used for tasks like checking chemical spills, searching rubble, and assessing victims in buildings. UGVs differ from aerial drones (unmanned aerial vehicles, UAVs) in that UAVs fly through the air using aerodynamic lift, while UGVs stay in contact with the ground and are designed for terrain like rubble, stairs, or confined indoor spaces.
NUSTL has not given a specific calendar date for release. The article states that the UGV SAVER assessment results will be released "soon" and that they will be posted on the SAVER page on DHS S&T’s website, alongside other UGV‑related reports. Practically, this means agencies and the public should look for the report in the SAVER Document Library on the S&T/SAVER webpage once it is posted.
Yes. The article explicitly describes the three systems assessed—Boston Dynamics Spot, Teledyne FLIR PackBot 525, and Ghost Robotics Vision 60—as commercially available UGVs, and both Boston Dynamics and Ghost Robotics openly market these platforms for government and public‑safety use. Local and state agencies can generally procure them the same way they purchase other specialized equipment: by buying directly from the manufacturers or their authorized integrators and by using whatever state, local, or federal contract vehicles and procurement rules apply in their jurisdiction. The SAVER program does not sell or endorse specific products; it provides comparative information to support those procurement decisions.
The specific limitations, safety concerns, or performance issues that responders identified during these August 2025 tests have not been publicly detailed. The article only notes that responders rated the UGVs on 20 criteria in the standard SAVER categories (capability, usability, and deployability), and that the detailed assessment results will be released in a forthcoming SAVER report. Until that report is published, common issues from this particular assessment cannot be reliably summarized.