Security Measures for Ferry Systems (2006)

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Guide for Evaluating Security Measures for the U.S. Ferry System P A R T I

1.1 Background Part I of this report and an accompanying Excel tool (which is available online at http://trb. org/news/blurb_detail.asp?id=6068) will assist the U.S. Ferry System (USFS) operators in evalu- ating and selecting security measures for their operations. The Excel tool contains a detailed list of general security measures (GSMs) and five sets of evaluation criteria that are weighted by the user. The evaluation criteria weights are used to calculate the value of each GSM option to the user, thereby enabling the user to compare many alternative options against user-specific criteria. This approach provides the user with a methodology to consider operator-specific requirements using operator-weighted criteria. Part I of this report, “Guide for Evaluating Security Measures for the U.S. Ferry System,” is designed to accompany the Excel tool and provide step-by-step guid- ance for evaluating GSMs. Evaluation steps and tool use were tested during a series of meetings with representatives from the Washington State Ferry, Washington State Patrol, and Washington-area U.S. Coast Guard. An important outcome of this test was recognition that the most broadly applicable GSMs (e.g., human observations and video monitoring) may rank much higher with this evaluation system than GSMs that are typically applied in only a few specific areas (e.g., screening). The objective and scope of this guide are described below. The steps of the evaluation process are described in Chapter 2. Chapter 3 provides a more detailed description of the tool layout. 1.2 Objective, Scope, and Limitations The objective of this project is to provide guidance to the USFS operators in selecting GSMs for their specific operational environment. The GSMs addressed include the following major cat- egories: fencing and barriers, access control, intruder sensors, monitoring, procedural and low- cost measures, screening, waterside security, and human observation. This guide and the accompanying Excel tool are designed to help ferry system operators sift through the many secu- rity measures available, not to prescribe security measures or limit security options. As part of the objective to provide guidance for evaluation of GSMs, sample data are provided on GSMs. The cost data are provided as an example of the type of data to be collected during the GSM evaluation process; they are not estimates for use. These values need to be updated by the user to reflect current values for site-specific conditions. The thoroughness of updates should increase as the GSM options are narrowed and as they become more specific. Although there has been substantial interest in screening measures for ferry operators because of regulatory pressure, this guide and the accompanying Excel tool are for GSMs, of which 3 C H A P T E R 1 Introduction

screening is just one category. A guide specifically for evaluation of screening measures would likely include comparison of characteristics such as specific substances detected, sensitivity for detected substances, rates of false positives, rates of false negatives, throughput, and so forth. This information can be added to the tool by the user, but is not part of this project because the goal was to address a broad array of security measures, many of which do not have similar statistics for comparison. 4 Part I: Guide for Evaluating Security Measures for the U.S. Ferry System

2.1 Overview The GSM evaluation process is presented as a series of seven steps. The steps allow users to weigh their evaluation criteria and then identify and quantitatively contrast candidate security measures for their ferry system operation. In addition to evaluation criteria, other considerations in identifying and contrasting GSMs include applicability, costs, pre- and co-requisites, and strengths and weaknesses. Table 1 displays the categories and sub-categories of GSMs included in the accompanying tool. These GSM categories are not addressed equally. For example, while lists of “fencing/barriers” and “intruder sensors” are relatively comprehensive in their address of applicable technologies, the list of “screening” measures is much less comprehensive, largely because of the developmen- tal level of many of these technologies. A dozen or so different screening technologies for trace detection are not included because their current use is primarily in laboratories or as prototype or demonstration field units. The seven steps for evaluation of these GSMs are shown in Figure 1 and summarized below. Further details regarding the tool that accompanies these steps are provided in Chapter 3. 2.2 The Seven Steps Step 1: Enter weights GSMs may be evaluated using many different criteria (e.g., achieving regulatory compliance or applicability to a specific threat type). The importance of different groups of criteria depends on the user’s objectives.Worksheet 1 of the Excel file provides several different groups of evaluation criteria. The users weigh the importance of these criteria from 0 to 5 based on their needs and vulnerabilities. Zeros can be entered as the weight of evaluation criteria that are of no interest. Step 2: Sort by value User-entered weights of evaluation criteria (entered in Step 1) and the relative applicability ranks for each security measure (i.e., provided in Worksheet 2) are used to automatically cal- culate relative valuation of each security measure. Relative valuations are calculated in value, or “utils,” for each evaluation criteria group. To develop a short list of GSMs for further eval- uation, the user sorts GSMs based on utils in Worksheet 2. GSMs that have the greatest num- ber of utils are recorded by the user on paper to develop a list for further evaluation. Step 3: Edit data The paper list of GSMs with the most utils (obtained in Step 2) is further assessed based on char- acterization of the GSMs. Listed GSMs are looked up in Worksheet 3, and the characterization 5 C H A P T E R 2 The Evaluation Process

6 Part I: Guide for Evaluating Security Measures for the U.S. Ferry System GSM Categories and Sub-Categories # of GSMs Fencing/Barriers Retractable vehicle barriers/gates 5 Fixed vehicle deterrent with pedestrian access 4 Fixed, both vehicle and pedestrian deterrent 5 Access Control Credentials 13 Locks 3 System Control 3 Intruder Sensors Perimeter (doors & windows, walls & fences, and buried) 13 Volume sensors – motion detectors 9 Monitoring Lighting 3 CCTV/video 7 Procedural/Low Cost 5 Waterside Security Surface Underwater 4 5 Screening Passengers and Cargo 7 Trace Detection 14 Human Observation All Areas 3 Waterside 2 Table 1. Categorization of GSMs. SHEET 4 Applicability Ranks Review and update applicability ranking of GSMs. STEP 5 Re-sort by value SHEET 1 Evaluation Weights Enter weights for evaluation criteria. STEP 1 Enter weights STEP 4 Edit data SHEET 6 Costs/Util Sort GSMs by cost/util and assess strengths and weaknesses. STEP 7 Sort by cost/ value SHEET 2 Valuations (Utils) Sort GSMs by valuations (utils) and develop a list of GSMs for further evaluation. STEP 2 Sort by value SHEET 5 Costs Enter costs and assess requisites. STEP 6 Enter costs SHEET 3 Characterization Review and update characterization of GSMs. STEP 3 Edit data Figure 1. GSM evaluation steps and worksheet pages.

information is reviewed to determine if any GSMs should be removed from the paper list because either the measure has already been implemented or the measure cannot be reason- ably implemented for technical reasons. Examples of conditions that may cause removal of some options include ground surfaces entirely covered by asphalt or concrete, which would prevent effective use of buried fiber optic intruder sensors, or limited space, which could pre- vent construction of efficient earthen barriers. (Note that cost should not be considered at this stage of the evaluation.) Step 4: Edit data The paper list of GSMs developed in Step 2 and refined in Step 3 is used to identify rows in Worksheet 4 that should be reviewed and adjusted as needed. Applicability ranks from 0 to 3 to indicate how well a specific GSM meets the various evaluation criteria (described in Work- sheet 1). These rankings are subjective, but are unlikely to differ from the ranking provided by more than one unit when the evaluation criteria are similarly understood. Step 5: Re-sort by value The user returns to Worksheet 2 to sort GSMs again with the adjusted information entered in Steps 3 and 4. Top GSMs based on number of utils are listed on paper for further evaluation. Step 6: Enter costs The next step in evaluating the short list is to update the cost-related data in Worksheet 5 to reflect the projected needs with respect to system size and to reflect any pre- or co-requisites that may need to be implemented. Concurrently determine comparable units for cost com- parisons between rows (e.g., full implementation at all relevant sites in the facility) and adjust cost data based on updated information. Note that the cost data provided in the worksheet are rough estimates that are often based on a small sampling of costs; thus, they provide only a rough cost range (i.e., within an order of magnitude). In some cases, the cost range repre- sents substantial differences in capability that are shown in one row because they employ the same technology. For example, IMS screening trace detectors have a cost range listed as $7,000 to $34,000, which represents the approximate costs of small hand-held units up through con- tinuous monitoring systems able to detect a greater variety of agents. In some cases, the user should create new rows to represent variations in measures with the same technology by overwriting rows that are not on the short list for further evaluation. When it is decided to replace a row’s contents, changes should be made in Worksheet 3 to describe specific GSM characteristics, in Worksheet 4 to record applicability ranks, and in Worksheet 5 for cost data and requisite information. References provided in Worksheet 5 can be used to begin cost assessments. Step 7: Sort by cost/value After cost data have been updated in the short list, cost per util is calculated in Worksheet 6. The user can then sort by cost per util to further prioritize the short list, with the lowest cost per util suggesting the largest security improvement per dollar. The user should carefully assess strengths and weaknesses of the security measures. Further research to expand under- standing of strengths, weaknesses, variations, and costs may be needed. Suppliers should be contacted for specific information, product demonstrations, and on-site equipment trials. Other organizations, particularly the U.S. Coast Guard and Captain of the Port, should also be consulted regarding selection of the final options. Chapter 2: The Evaluation Process 7

3.1 Worksheet Integration and Data Flow When the accompanying Excel file is opened, tabs at the bottom of the screen indicate sepa- rate worksheets within the tool. Each worksheet takes up more than a standard-size view screen. The “Page Down” key can be used to view the lower rows. In the worksheets that are wider than the view screen, the right arrow key can be used to view the remaining columns. The worksheet labels shown on the tabs at the bottom of the workbook are listed below with a brief description of their contents. • 1. Evaluation Weights—for entry of evaluation criteria weights. • 2. Valuations—for sorting of GSMs based on utils. • 3. Characteristics—for review and editing of GSM characteristics. • 4. Applicability Ranks—for review and editing of GSM applicability ranks according to the evaluation criteria. • 5. Costs—for development of GSM costs and assessment of GSM pre- and co-requisites. • 6. Cost-Util & Strengths—for sorting of GSMs based on cost per util and for assessing GSM strengths and weaknesses. • References—lists references referred to in Worksheets 3 and 5. • Hidden Calculations—uses entries in Worksheets 1 and 4 to calculate values shown in Work- sheets 2 and 6. The user does not need to view this worksheet. Each worksheet is described in detail below. Figure 2 provides a diagram of the data flow between the worksheets. 3.2 Worksheet 1, Evaluation Weights The tool uses five sets of evaluation criteria to calculate the utils of various security measures for an operation: security objectives, non-security effects, 33 CFR compliance, locations, and threat type. The completed tables in Worksheet 1 of the tool will be used to weigh the impor- tance of the different evaluation criteria to the operation. The tables from Worksheet 1 are grouped by evaluation criteria and are provided below. 8 C H A P T E R 3 The Tool

3.2.1 Criteria Group 1: Security Objectives Four general security objectives are considered: deter, detect, deny, and mitigate. A security measure can be selected on the basis of how well it contributes to one or more of these security objectives. Each of these objectives is described below. After each description, enter the number weight from 0 to 5 (see definitions below) that best indicates the relative importance of this objec- tive to your security needs. Chapter 3: The Tool 9 Sheet 4: Applicability Ranks • Data entry of ranks. • Copies characteristics from Sheet 3 for viewing. Sheet 1: Evaluation Weights • Data entry of evaluation criteria weights. Sheet 6: Cost-Util & Strengths • User sort of GSM by cost-util. • Data entry of GSM strengths and weaknesses. Sheet 3: Characterization • Data entry of GSM characteristics. Sheet 5: Costs • Data Entry of GSM Costs and Requisites. • Copies characteristics from Sheet 3 for viewing. Hidden Calculations Sheet • Calculates Utils from evaluation weights on Sheet 1 and ranks on Sheet 4. • Copies characteristics from Sheet 2 for viewing. • Copies evaluation weights from Sheet 1 for viewing. Sheet 2: Valuations • Allows user to sort GSMs by “utils.” • Copies character- istics from Sheet 3. Figure 2. Data flow between worksheets of the GSM evaluation tool. 0 = not important 1 = low importance 2 = low to moderate importance 3 = moderate importance 4 = moderate to high importance 5 = high importance Security Objectives Importance (0 – 5) Deter: To cause an adversary to abandon consideration of this site during their planning stage due to the introduction of certain security measures. Deterrence is due to one or both of the following: (a) the target was devalued, (b) the probability of success was decreased. Detect: To discover (a) the planning of a threatening event, such as may be indicated by extensive observation of operations or equipment, or (b) the presence of a threat agent (e.g., weapon or explosive). Deny: To deny access to a target by such measures as barrier reinforcement, unexpected relocation of the target, and patterns that differ from those expected. Mitigate: To reduce the effects of an event when it occurs by either (a) reducing the magnitude of an event (e.g., reduced target size) or (b) preventing the threat agent from being maximally effective (e.g., because of a sprinkler system or rapid identification of a released toxin).

3.2.3 Criteria Group 3: 33 CFR Compliance Facilities and vessels that fall under 33 CFR 104 and 105 must implement security measures that fall under the five general categories listed below. If your operation is in compliance with these regulations, these categories may not be important for you when evaluating additional security measures. Alternatively, you may have interest in further measures within some of these categories regardless of compliance. For each 33 CFR category listed below, indicate the impor- tance of the category for your selection of new security measures. 10 Part I: Guide for Evaluating Security Measures for the U.S. Ferry System Non-Security Effects Importance (0 – 5) Safety – refers to both employee and passenger safety Crime – refers to general crime other than fare evasion Fare Evasion – refers only to fare evasion Service – refers to both possible service delays and service improvements 0 = not important 1 = low importance 2 = low to moderate importance 3 = moderate importance 4 = moderate to high importance 5 = high importance 0 = not important/already in compliance 1 = low importance 2 = low to moderate importance 3 = moderate importance 4 = moderate to high importance 5 = high importance/not in compliance 33 CFR Compliance Importance (0 – 5) Access Control (includes screening measures) Restricted Areas Handling Cargo Stores and Bunkers Monitoring 3.2.2 Criteria Group 2: Non-Security Effects Many security measures also have non-security effects that may be either beneficial or detri- mental. This group of evaluation criteria allows you to weight the importance of these non- security effects on your selection of security measures. After each description, indicate the relative importance of this described non-security effect in your security measure decision making.

Chapter 3: The Tool 11 3.2.4 Criteria Group 4: Locations Based on an assessment of your operation’s vulnerabilities (i.e., potential consequences and target accessibility), particular locations in or near your operation may be identified as being more or less vulnerable to attack. After each location description below, indicate the relative importance of implementing additional security measures in the location area. Enter “0” for loca- tions listed that are not applicable to your operations. 0 = not important 1 = low importance 2 = low to moderate importance 3 = moderate importance 4 = moderate to high importance 5 = high importance Locations Importance (0 – 5) Beyond Boundary (Shoreside): Access routes to the ferry system, adjacent assets that can be used as means for affecting an event (e.g., stored fuel), tall structures that can be used as observation and planning sites, etc. Facility Perimeter: The shoreside property boundary. Vehicle Parking: Shoreside areas for vehicle parking, particularly public parking areas near ferry operations. Vehicle Holding: Shoreside areas for parking and screening vehicles prior to loading them onto a ferry Passenger Waiting: Shoreside areas for passengers, including ticketing and passenger screening areas. Terminal Operation: Shoreside areas for operation control that are not for general passengers. Adjacent Ferry (Shoreside): Shoreside area within approximately 30 feet of ferry vessels. Adjacent Ferry (Waterside): Waterside area within approximately 30 feet of ferry vessels. On-Board (Non-Restricted): Passenger areas on-board the ferry. On-Board (Restricted): Areas on-board the ferry that are not to have passenger access. In Transit: Areas surrounding a ferry while it is operating on a route or otherwise in transit.

12 Part I: Guide for Evaluating Security Measures for the U.S. Ferry System 0 = not important 1 = low importance 2 = low to moderate importance 3 = moderate importance 4 = moderate to high importance 5 = high importance Threat Type Importance (0 – 5) Delivery of Explosive or Incendiary by Person – on a person or within their baggage Vehicle – within a car, van, or truck Vessel – within a waterside vessel Artillery (e.g., RPG) – from a location in range of the facility or ferry routes Mine – underwater explosive on piers, vessels, etc. Overhead – from anything overhead, e.g., aircraft, bridge over the ferry route, etc. Act of Force TO: Facility – terminal or pier Vessel – ferry or ferry patrol vessel BY: Vehicle – car, van, or truck Vessel – waterside vessel, surface or underwater Overhead – airplane or bridge WMD Delivery of: Chem – toxic chemical agent Bio – harmful biological agent Rad – radioactive agent 3.2.5 Criteria Group 5: Threat Type Three general categories of threats are considered: delivery of explosives or incendiaries; acts of force (e.g., hijacking, commandeering, and ramming); and delivery of WMDs (i.e., chemical, biological, or radiological agents). Based on assessments of your operation’s vulnerabilities, some threats may be of more concern than others. For each threat type below, indicate the relative importance of additional security measures to address the threat.

When the information in Worksheet 1 is completed, the tool calculates the value of each GSM in accordance with the user-set weighting factors. These will appear in Worksheet 2, Valuations. 3.3 Worksheet 2, Valuations Figure 3 shows a view of Worksheet 2, Valuations. This worksheet is used to sort GSMs based on valuations in utils. These valuations are calculated from the weights given by the user to dif- ferent evaluation criteria (entered in Worksheet 1, Evaluation Weights), and from the applica- bility rankings of GSMs (entered in Worksheet 4, Applicability Ranks). Step 2 (see Figure 1) requires the following: • Sort area A11 to P112 by Columns G through O (refer to the box below for instructions on sorting in Excel). This will provide the first prioritizations of GSMs. • In Column P, enter the order of sorted rows for comparison with subsequent sorts. • Record (in a separate file or on paper) the GSM numbers (from Column A) that are of great- est interest to you for further analysis. Any edits made in this worksheet will not be copied to other worksheets. Changes in cell content should be made in Worksheet 3 (Characterization) to change content in Columns A through E, and Worksheets 1 (Evaluation Weights) and 4 (Applicability Ranks) to change the utils shown in Columns G through O. 3.2.6 Evaluation Criteria Groups The weights entered in the tables above are used to assess the operator’s priorities within a sin- gle evaluation criteria group (i.e., security objectives, non-security effects, 33 CFR compliance, locations, or threat type). The weights provided below will be used to adjust weights between evaluation criteria groups according to the priorities for your operation. After each description, enter the number from 0 to 5 (see definitions below) that best indicates the relative importance of the evaluation criteria group. Chapter 3: The Tool 13 0 = not important 1 = low importance 2 = low to moderate importance 3 = moderate importance 4 = moderate to high importance 5 = high importance Evaluation Criteria Groups Importance (0 – 5) Security Objectives Non-Security Effects 33 CFR Compliance Locations Threat Type

14 Part I: Guide for Evaluating Security Measures for the U.S. Ferry System 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P VALUATION ("UTILS") OF GSM BY DIFFERENT EVALUATION CRITERIA GSM CHARACTERIZATION GSM # General Security Measures (GSMs) Options and Variations of GSMs Threat Type Total EID Only Act of Force Only WMD Only 1 Fencing / Barriers Retractable Vehicle Deterrents Ramp/ Wedge, in-ground mounted Manual or automatic raising and lowering; some products rated as high as DOS K12/ L3. 14.6 -1.8 4.5 5.3 8.9 3.7 2.7 2.5 31.6 2 Fencing / Barriers Retractable Vehicle Deterrents Bollards, retractable (steel or concrete) Hydraulic, electro-hydraulic, or manual retraction into ground. Some products rated as high as DOS K12/ L3 depending on installation. 13.4 0.9 4.5 6.4 8.9 3.7 2.7 2.5 34.2 3 Fencing / Barriers Retractable Vehicle Deterrents Ramp/ wedge, surface mounted Manual or automatic operation. Chain reinforcements increase anti-ram capability, but substantially lower anti-ram ratings than in-ground mounted ramps (listed separately). 13.4 0.9 4.5 5.3 8.9 3.7 2.7 2.5 33 4 Fencing / Barriers Retractable Vehicle Deterrents Booms and Crash Beams (sliding or swing gates) Manual, automatic, or portable. Range from minimal anti-ram capability to DOS K4/L2 or higher. 13.4 0.9 4.5 5.3 8.9 3.7 2.7 2.5 33 5 Fencing / Barriers Retractable Vehicle Deterrents Traffic controllers ("tire teeth") Spring-mounted to allow safe one-way travel, or retractable (with access control) to allow two-way travel. Wrong-way penetration distance can be reduced with low speed conditions. 13.4 0.9 4.5 4.0 8.9 3.7 2.7 2.5 32 6 Fencing / Barriers Fixed Vehicle Deterrent, Pedestrian Access Bollards, fixed/stationary (concrete or steel) Variable anti-ram capability. Some products rated as high as DOS K12/ L3 depending on installation. 13.4 6.2 4.5 8.6 8.9 3.7 2.7 2.5 42 EXPLANATION OF COLUMNS BELOW "Utils" are calculated from the weights given by the user to different evaluation criteria (entered on Sheet 1 "Evaluation Weights"), and from the applicability ranks of GSMs (entered on Sheet 4 "Applicability Ranks"). INSTRUCTIONS: For Sorting Only (DO NOT Enter New Data on this Page!) Sort area A11 to P112 by Columns G through O. In Column P, you can enter the order of sorted rows for comparison to subsequent sorts. Develop a "Further Evaluation" list on paper, by recording the GSM #s (Column A) that are of greatest interest to you for further analysis. To enter new data: Use Sheet 1 to change Evaluation Weights. Use Sheet 3 to change GSM Characterization (Columns C to E). Use Sheet 4 to change Applicability Ranks. Method Category TOTAL (All Criteria) GROUPED EVALUATION CRITERIA VALUATION IN UTILS Your GSM List # Threat Type Security Objective Non- Security Effects 33 CFR Compli- ance Security Locations Figure 3. View of Worksheet 2, Valuations. How to Sort in Excel Highlight the area to be sorted. To do this on Worksheet 2, start with the cursor in Cell A11, hold the “shift” key down while moving the mouse to Cell P11. While still holding the shift key down, press “down page,” or “end” followed by down arrow. The entire contents from Cells A11 to P112 should be highlighted. Release the shift key and click on “Data” at the top of the screen, then click on “sort” in the drop- down box. Click on the down arrow to show the drop box under “Sort By,” select “Column O” to sort on the “Total Utils” or other columns to sort by a particular evaluation criteria group. Select “Descending” to the right of the drop-box and then click “OK” at the bottom of the “Sort” box. The highlighted area will be re- ordered with the GSMs with the highest number of utils at the top of the page.

3.4 Worksheet 3, Characterization Figure 4 shows a view of Worksheet 3, Characterization. The columns in this worksheet pro- vide descriptions of each GSM listed in Rows 11 to 112. Column E,“Notes,” describes each GSM, and Column F, “Options and Variations of GSM,” describes some of the common variations for each GSM. Step 3 (see Figure 1) requires the following: • Look up (in Column A) the GSM numbers recorded on your short list (in a file or on paper) for further evaluation. • Review the characterization information to determine if any GSM should be removed from the short list. A GSM should be removed from consideration either because the measure has already been implemented or because the measure cannot be reasonably implemented for technical reasons. Examples of conditions that may cause exclusion of some options include ground surfaces entirely covered by asphalt or concrete, which would prevent effective use of buried fiber optic intruder sensors; or limited space, which could prevent construction of efficient earthen barriers. Note that cost should not be considered at this stage of the evaluation. • You may edit Columns C through F to describe more specific GSMs as needed. Chapter 3: The Tool 15 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 A B C D E F G H CHARACTERIZATION OF GSM GSM CHARACTERIZATION GSM # GSM Notes Options and Variations of GSM More Info. (Ref.) 1 Fencing / Barriers Retractable Vehicle Deterrents Ramp/ Wedge, in-ground mounted Manual or automatic raising and lowering; some products rated as high as DOS K12/ L3. 5, 6, 54 2 Fencing / Barriers Retractable Vehicle Deterrents Bollards, retractable (steel or concrete) Hydraulic, electro-hydraulic, or manual retraction into ground. Some products rated as high as DOS K12/ L3 depending on installation. 5, 6, 54 3 Fencing / Barriers Retractable Vehicle Deterrents Ramp/ wedge, surface mounted Manual or automatic operation. Chain reinforcements increase anti-ram capability, but substantially lower anti- ram ratings than in-ground mounted ramps (listed separately). 5, 6, 54 4 Fencing / Barriers Retractable Vehicle Deterrents Booms and Crash Beams (sliding or swing gates) Manual, automatic, or portable. Range from minimal anti- ram capability to DOS K4/L2 or higher. 6, 54 5 Fencing / Barriers Retractable Vehicle Deterrents Traffic controllers ("tire teeth") Traffic controllers are not certified anti-ram barriers. They can be penetrated by vehicles with puncture proof tires. Under some circumstances a vehicle with standard tires may penetrate a significant distance after it's tires are shred. Spring-mounted to allow safe one-way travel, or retractable (with access control) to allow two-way travel. Wrong-way penetration distance can be reduced with low speed conditions. 5 6 Fencing / Barriers Fixed Vehicle Deterrent, Pedestrian Access Bollards, fixed/stationary (concrete or steel) May be certified anti-ram vehicle barriers have been tested to either Department of State (DOS), U.S. Navy, or U.S. Marshall Service specifications, the later two of which are often converted to DOS ratings. K ratings indicate kinetic energy (determined from speed and weight), L ratings indicate the extent of penetration beyond the barrier. K and L ratings of speed and penetration described below are for a 15,000 lb vehicle with impact perpendicular to the barrier: K4 -- 30 mph L1 -- 20 to 50 feet K8 -- 40 mph L2 -- 3 to 20 feet K12 -- 50 mph L3 -- less than 3 feet Variable anti-ram capability. Some products rated as high as DOS K12/ L3 depending on installation. 5, 6, 59 7 Fencing / Barriers Fixed Vehicle Deterrent, Pedestrian Access Decorative Crash- Rated Barrier (spheres, benches, bike racks, trees, etc.) Crash-rated decorative furniture, bike racks, and planters are typically mounted on crash rated bollards or steel posts. Trees are rated based on trunk diameter. Branches and leaves can reduce observation and video monitoring ability. Wide variety of aesthetic options, metal or concrete. Variable anti-ram capability. Some products rated as high as DOS K12/ L3 depending on installation. 7, 8 8 Fencing / Barriers Fixed Vehicle Deterrent, Jersey Barriers, portable Jersey barriers are often used as temporary barriers, They are grouped here as a "fixed vehicle-deterrent" because they typically provide a temporary Various styles, lengths, shapes, colors, can be arranged end-to-end, or in multiple rows, and anchored to 5, 59 INSTRUCTIONS: For data edits only! DO NOT SORT on this page!! The columns below provide descriptions of each GSM listed in rows 11 to 112. For each GSM # on your paper list of GSMs for fur performed on Sheet 2 "Valuations"), review the characterization information provided below. You may edit Columns C through F to describe more specific GSMs as needed. ther evaluation (developed from the sorts Use GSM # (Column A) to quickly find GSMs at the top of your list. May be certified anti-ram vehicle barriers that have been tested to either Department of State (DOS), U.S. Navy, or U.S. Marshall Service specifications, the later two of which are often converted to DOS ratings. K ratings indicate kinetic energy (determined from speed and weight), L ratings indicate the extent of penetration beyond the barrier. K and L ratings of speed and penetration described below are for a 15,000 lb vehicle with impact perpendicular to the barrier: K4 -- 30 mph L1 -- 20 to 50 feet K8 -- 40 mph L2 -- 3 to 20 feet K12 -- 50 mph L3 -- less than 3 feet Method Category Figure 4. View of Worksheet 3, Characterization.

Do not sort in this worksheet because other worksheets copy information from specified cells in this worksheet, which will be incorrect if this worksheet is sorted. Use GSM # (Column A) to quickly find GSMs on your short list for further evaluation. 3.5 Worksheet 4, Applicability Ranks Figure 5 shows a view of Worksheet 4, Applicability Ranks. This worksheet is used to adjust applicability rankings of specific GSMs against the evaluation criteria listed in Row 9 (Column F–AV), and described in Worksheet 1. The purpose of this worksheet is to provide the user with the opportunity to review and, if needed, adjust the applicability ranks provided for the short list of GSMs developed from the sorts conducted in Worksheet 2, Valuations. The worksheet contains relative, generalized rankings for each GSM for each of the evaluation criteria. These rankings are multiplied by the evaluation criteria weights (entered in Worksheet 1, Evaluation Weights) to provide the valuations for each GSM shown in Worksheet 2. The appli- 16 Part I: Guide for Evaluating Security Measures for the U.S. Ferry System 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z AA AB AC AD AE AF A AH AI AJ AK AL AM AN AO AP AQ AR AS AT AU APPLICABILITY RANKS OF GSMS EVALUATION CRITERIA (Column Headers) & APPLICABILITY RANKS OF GSMS (Rows 11 to 112) GSM CHARACTERIZATION To By GSM # GSM No n- re st ric t R es tri ct ed Pe rs on Ve hi cl e Ve ss el Ar till er y M in e O ve rh ea d Fa cil ity Ve ss el Ve hi cl e Ve ss el O ve rh ea d Ch em . Bi o R ad . 5 4 3 2 2 1 3 5 5 4 0 1 4 1 1 0 5 4 2 1 2 1 3 2 3 5 2 1 1 1 1 3 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 Fencing / Barriers Retractable Vehicle Deterrents Ramp/ Wedge, in-ground mounted 2 2 2 1 0 0 1 -1 3 3 1 1 1 0 3 3 3 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 3 1 3 0 0 1 1 1 2 Fencing / Barriers Retractable Vehicle Deterrents Bollards, retractable (steel or concrete) 2 2 2 0 0 0 2 -1 3 3 1 1 1 0 3 3 3 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 3 1 3 0 0 1 1 1 3 Fencing / Barriers Retractable Vehicle Deterrents Ramp/ wedge, surface mounted 2 2 2 0 0 0 2 -1 3 3 1 1 1 0 3 3 3 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 3 1 3 0 0 1 1 1 4 Fencing / Barriers Retractable Vehicle Deterrents Booms and Crash Beams (sliding or swing gates) 2 2 2 0 0 0 2 -1 3 3 1 1 1 0 3 3 3 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 3 1 3 0 0 1 1 1 5 Fencing / Barriers Retractable Vehicle Deterrents Traffic controllers ("tire teeth") 2 2 2 0 0 0 2 -1 3 3 1 1 1 0 3 2 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 3 1 3 0 0 1 1 1 6 Fencing / Barriers Fixed Vehicle Deterrent, Pedestrian Access Bollards, fixed/stationary (concrete or steel) 2 2 2 0 0 1 2 0 3 3 1 1 1 0 3 3 3 2 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 3 1 3 0 0 1 1 1 7 Fencing / Fixed Vehicle Decorative Crash- Security Locations Method Category On- board Shoreside Waterside Ac ce ss C on tro l R es tri ct ed A re a H an dl in g Ca rg o St or es & B un ke rs EVALUATION WEIGHTS (Copied from Sheet 1) In T ra ns it D et er D et ec t Sa fe ty Ve hi cl e Pa rk in g Te rm in a l O pe ra tio n Ad jac en t F err y Ad jac en t F err y Applicability by Threat Type Act of Force WMD Delivery Delivery of Explosive or Incendiary M on ito rin g Be yo nd B ou nd ar y Fa cil ity P er im et er Ve hi cl e H ol di ng INSTRUCTIONS DO NOT SORT on this sheet!! GSMs are ranked below in Columns F through AV by their applicability to the evaluation criteria shown as column headers on this page and described on Sheet 1. Find the GSM on your "Further Evaluation" list by GSM # (Column A) and edit the applicability ranks in Cells F11 through AV112 as needed. Applicability ranks should be considered within evaluation criteria groups (not between groups). Pa ss e n ge r W ai tin g Non-Security Effect (+ or -) 33 CFR Compliance Security Objectives Cr im e Fa re E va sio n Se rv ice De ny M itig at e Applicability Ranks (Columns F through AU) 0 = Not Applicable 2 = Moderate Applicability 1 = Low Applicability 3 = High Applicability Service Effect Ranks (Column N only) 0 = No impact -1 = Some negative effect -2 = Moderately negative effect Figure 5. View of Worksheet 4, Applicability Ranks.

cability ranks provided in Cells F11 through AV112 are used to make an initial review and a gen- eralized comparison of measures. The relative rankings are: 0 = none or not applicable 1 = low 2 = moderate 3 = high A different rank scale is used for service effects in Column H. Service effects ranks are: 0 = no impact −1 = some negative effect −2 = moderately negative effect The user is in a good position to determine the applicability of each GSM to their operations and, as such, is encouraged to make adjustment to the GSMs on their short list. Applicability ranks should be considered within evaluation criteria groups (not between groups). A rank change of more than one may be due to differing considerations of the GSM’s characteristics (listed in Worksheet 3, Characterization) or differing understandings of the evaluation criteria as described in Worksheet 1, Evaluation Weights. Thus, careful consideration should be given to applicability ranks that are changed by more than one. This worksheet should be used only to edit applicability ranks. Use Worksheet 3, Characterization, to change GSM descriptions to make the characteristic changes appear in all worksheets. 3.6 Worksheet 5, Costs Figure 6 shows a view of Worksheet 5, Costs. This worksheet provides the user with the oppor- tunity to enter system- and region-specific cost information for the short list of candidate GSMs. This worksheet is Step 6 in Figure 1. The worksheet contains generalized cost information that is based on a small sampling of costs; thus, these cost ranges are rough (i.e., order of magnitude). In some cases, the cost range listed for a GSM is very wide, reflecting the broad range of capabil- ities. For example, IMS screening trace detectors have a cost range listed as $7,000 to $34,000, which represents the approximate costs of small hand-held units up to continuous monitoring systems able to detect a greater variety of agents. Cost references are provided in Column O, with references details in the References worksheet. Before making changes to costs, note that the cost information entered by the user in Columns G through K should reflect the projected needs with respect to system size and reflect any pre- or co-requisites that may be needed. Likely pre- and co-requisites are shown in Columns Q and R. The steps needed for adjusting the costs are: • Develop a “new” short list of candidate GSMs (Step 5 in Figure 1) after editing applicability ranks in Worksheet 4 (Step 4 in Figure 1). • Determine comparable units for cost comparisons between the GSMs on the short list (e.g., full implementation at all relevant sites in the facility). • Make adjustments to low and high initial cost estimates—Columns G and H, respectively. Note the unit of measure in Column I. • Adjust the operation and maintenance (O&M) costs in terms of percentage of initial cost per year in Column J.These percentages should assume full operability throughout the GSM operating life. Chapter 3: The Tool 17

• Adjust the expected operating life of the GSM in Column K. • Update the relative technology maturity of the GSM in Column P, using the number ranking below. Less mature and less available technologies are more likely to undergo significant changes in cost within several years; thus, cost information for these GSMs should be consid- ered tentative. 1 = Mature, wide commercial availability 2 = Mature, limited commercial availability 3 = Developing technology, wide availability 4 = Developing technology, limited availability Simple annualized cost as $/year/unit is automatically calculated in Column L based on an average initial cost (average of Columns G and H), operating life (Column K), and O&M per- centage of initial cost per year (Column J). Do not change information in Columns A through E. These columns are copies of GSM descrip- tion information from Worksheet 2. 18 Part I: Guide for Evaluating Security Measures for the U.S. Ferry System 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R COSTS AND REQUISITES OF SECURITY MEASURES If more specific information is needed in Columns C through E, make these changes on Sheet 3 (Applicablity Ranks). CHARACTERIZATION OF SECURITY MEASURES GSM # GSM Options and Variations of GSM Low Initial Cost (IC) ($) High Initial Cost (IC) ($) Unit of Measure for IC O&M % of IC/yr Operating Life (years) Simple Annualized Cost ($/yr/unit) Units Needed Annualized System Cost ($/yr/syst) Cost Ref Pre-requisite Co-requisite 1 Fencing / Barriers Retractable Vehicle Deterrents Ramp/ Wedge, in-ground mounted Manual or automatic raising and lowering; some products rated as high as DOS K12/ L3. 25,000 50,000 10-ft unit 7% 20 $4,500 2 $9,000 5, 54 1 AC or DC power for raising. Access control for operation. High security requires barriers on each side of the drive. 2 Fencing / Barriers Retractable Vehicle Deterrents Bollards, retractable (steel or concrete) Hydraulic, electro-hydraulic, or manual retraction into ground. Some products rated as high as DOS K12/ L3 depending on installation. 200 600 single unit 7% 20 $48 15 $720 5, 54 1 Requires construction contractor. May require electric power for raising. Access control for operation. High security requires barriers on each side of the drive. 3 Fencing / Barriers Retractable Vehicle Deterrents Ramp/ wedge, surface mounted Manual or automatic operation. Chain reinforcements increase anti-ram capability, but substantially lower anti- ram ratings than in-ground mounted ramps (listed separately). 10,000 25,000 10-ft unit 7% 15 $2,392 2 $4,783 5, 54 1 Level concrete slab for attachment. May require electric power for raising. Access control for operation. High security requires barriers on each side of the drive. 4 Fencing / Barriers Retractable Vehicle Deterrents Booms and Crash Beams (sliding or swing gates) Manual, automatic, or portable. Range from minimal anti-ram capability to DOS K4/L2 or higher. 3,000 40,000 14-ft unit 7% 15 $2,938 2 $5,877 5, 54 1 AC or DC power for opening and closing. Access control for operation. High security requires barriers on each side of the drive. 5 Fencing / Barriers Retractable Vehicle Deterrents Traffic controllers ("tire teeth") Spring-mounted to allow safe one-way travel, or retractable (with access control) to allow two-way travel. Wrong- way penetration distance can be reduced with low speed conditions. 2,000 15,000 10-ft unit 5% 10 $1,275 2 $2,550 5 1 Flat surface for installation, good drainage. Access control for operation of retractable units. High security requires barriers on each side of the drive. 6 Fencing / Barriers Fixed Vehicle Deterrent, Pedestrian Access Bollards, fixed/stationary (concrete or steel) Variable anti-ram capability. Some products rated as high as DOS K12/ L3 depending on installation. 100 500 single unit 5% 20 $30 15 $450 5, 59 1 Requires construction contractor. None 7 Fencing / Barriers Fixed Vehicle Deterrent, Pedestrian Access Decorative Crash- Rated Barrier (spheres, benches, bike racks, trees, etc.) Wide variety of aesthetic options, metal or concrete. Variable anti-ram capability. Some products rated as high as DOS K12/ L3 depending on installation. 200 1,000 single unit 5% 15 $70 5 $350 7, 8 1 Sufficient space. None 8 Fencing / Barriers Fixed Vehicle Deterrent, Pedestrian Access Jersey Barriers, portable (water filled or steel reinforced concrete) Various styles, lengths, shapes, colors, can be arranged end-to-end, or in multiple rows, and anchored to increase anti-ram capability for equivalence to DOS K12. 100 500 10-ft unit 3% 20 $24 10 $240 5, 59 1 Moving equipment. Physical attachment to mounting surface for maximum protection. None 9 Fencing / Barriers Fixed Vehicle Deterrent, Pedestrian Access Planters (standard) Standard planters (i.e., not attached to the ground) vary in size. 500 1,000 single unit 7% 20 $90 10 $900 5, 59 1 Equipment for placement, soil and plants. Upkeep of plants INSTRUCTIONS: DO NOT SORT on this page!! Enter cost data for the top GSMs identified on Sheet 2 (Valuations). Use GSM # (Column A) to quickly locate your top GSMs on this sheet. Cost information provided is very rough and is often not for full implementation. The cost reference in Column O may provide a beginning for collecting better cost data. Examine the requisite needs in Column Q and R to determine if these should be included in the cost information to be entered. RequisitesCost of a SAMPLE Security Measure Tech- nology MaturityMethod Category Figure 6. View of Worksheet 5, Costs.

3.7 Worksheet 6, Cost-Util & Strengths After cost data have been updated for GSMs on the short list, cost per util is calculated in Work- sheet 6 (shown in Figure 7). The user can sort Cells A11 to M112 in this worksheet in descend- ing order in Column H (cost per util) to further prioritize the short list, with the lowest cost per util suggesting the largest security improvement per dollar. Selection of candidate security measures should not be based solely on these sorts. The user should carefully assess strengths and weaknesses of the security measures (Columns J and K) and add additional information as needed (Column L). Further consideration of strengths, weak- nesses, variations, and costs may be needed. Suppliers should be contacted for specific informa- tion, product demonstrations, and on-site equipment trials. Other organizations should also be consulted regarding selection of the final options, particularly the U.S. Coast Guard and Captain of the Port, local law enforcement, and security experts. Changes should be made to GSM description or characterization (Columns A through E) based on this further research, which can be entered in Worksheet 3, Characterization. This may also cause changes in applicability ranks, which should be edited in Worksheet 4, Applicability Ranks, and changes in costs data should be made in Worksheet 5, Costs. Chapter 3: The Tool 19 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 A B C D E F G H I J K L COST PER "UTIL" AND GSM STRENGTHS AND WEAKNESSES CHARACTERIZATION OF SECURITY MEASURES Annualized Costs Other Information GSM # GSM Options and Variations of GSM Annulized System Cost ($/yr/syst) Cost Per "Util" Strengths Weaknesses Additional Information Developed by the User (e.g., sensitivity) 1 Fencing / Barriers Retractable Vehicle Deterrents Ramp/ Wedge, in-ground mounted Manual or automatic raising and lowering; some products rated as high as DOS K12/ L3. $9,000 $285 Effective retractable vehicle barrier, some raise in 2 seconds, often remains operational after vehicle impact. Ground surface modification for installation. Not very aesthetic. May cause injury to occupant or vehicle fire. Maintenance procedures (i.e., cleaning, lubrication). 2 Fencing / Barriers Retractable Vehicle Deterrents Bollards, retractable (steel or concrete) Hydraulic, electro-hydraulic, or manual retraction into ground. Some products rated as high as DOS K12/ L3 depending on installation. $720 $21 Effective retractable vehicle barrier. Inexpensive to install and maintain. Can be aesthetically tailored in wide variety of sizes. Outer aesthetic covering can be damaged and need to be replaced. May need engineering analysis to ensure robust design to meet specific needs. 3 Fencing / Barriers Retractable Vehicle Deterrents Ramp/ wedge, surface mounted Manual or automatic operation. Chain reinforcements increase anti-ram capability, but substantially lower anti-ram ratings than in-ground mounted ramps (listed separately). $4,783 $144 Easy installation, may be temporary or permanent. Lower anti-ram ability than in-ground mounted ramps/ wedges. 4 Fencing / Barriers Retractable Vehicle Deterrents Booms and Crash Beams (sliding or swing gates) Manual, automatic, or portable. Range from minimal anti-ram capability to DOS K4/L2 or higher. $5,877 $177 Best for frequent vehicle access needs. May damage vehicles with poorly timed closure. Has less anti-ram capability than ramps or bollards 5 Fencing / Barriers Retractable Vehicle Deterrents Traffic controllers ("tire teeth") Spring-mounted to allow safe one-way travel, or retractable (with access control) to allow two-way travel. Wrong-way penetration distance can be reduced with low speed conditions. $2,550 $80 Common in parking lot applications, easily installed by construction companies. Inadvertent tire damage from vehicles backing up or traveling in the wrong direction. 6 Fencing / Barriers Fixed Vehicle Deterrent, Pedestrian Access Bollards, fixed/stationary (concrete or steel) Variable anti-ram capability. Some products rated as high as DOS K12/ L3 depending on installation. $450 $11 Inexpensive to install and maintain. Can be aesthetically tailored in wide variety of sizes. Outer aesthetic covering can be damaged and need to be replaced. May need engineering analysis to ensure robust design to meet specific needs. 7 Fencing / Barriers Fixed Vehicle Deterrent, Pedestrian Access Decorative Crash- Rated Barrier (spheres, benches, bike racks, trees, etc.) Wide variety of aesthetic options, metal or concrete. Variable anti-ram capability. Some products rated as high as DOS K12/ L3 depending on installation. $350 $8 Aesthetically tailored, anti-ram rated, without creating a "security" atmosphere. May promote undesirable loitering. Options such as trees obscure broad view. 8 Fencing / Barriers Fixed Vehicle Deterrent, Pedestrian Access Jersey Barriers, portable (water filled or steel reinforced concrete) Various styles, lengths, shapes, colors, can be arranged end-to-end, or in multiple rows, and anchored to increase anti-ram capability for equivalence to DOS K12. $240 $6 Highly configurable, low cost and maintenance, empty water-filled units weigh less than 200 lbs and are easy to transport. Plastic versions require water-filling source and drainage area, and can have freezing problems. Concrete versions require a substantial forklift or 9 Fencing / Barriers Fixed Vehicle Deterrent, Planters (standard) Standard planters (i.e., not attached to the ground) vary in size. Aesthetically tailored vehicle deterrent, planter contents may be May become a projectile when rammed INSTUCTIONS Sort Cells A11 to M112 on this sheet in descending order in Column H. Add more information for comparing GSMs in Columns J, K, and L. Use Sheet 3 to change characterization information (Columns A through E). Use Sheet 5 to change cost information (Column G). Method Category Figure 7. View of Worksheet 6, Cost-Util & Strengths.

3.8 References Worksheet This worksheet provides full references for Column G of Worksheet 3, Characterization, and Column O of Worksheet 5, Costs. Wherever possible, Internet sites are provided. The sites pro- vided do not always display cost information, but they provide e-mail and telephone contact information through which costs estimates can be obtained. 3.9 Hidden Calculations Worksheet 3.9.1 Overview of Hidden Calculations The Hidden Calculations worksheet does not need to be viewed by the user. It uses entries in Worksheets 1 and 4 to calculate valuations (utils) and entries in Worksheet 3 to label the viewed GSMs. Valuations calculated in the Hidden Calculations worksheet are copied to Worksheet 2, Valuations. More advanced users may benefit from viewing additional breakdowns shown in the Hidden Calculations worksheet. While valuations in Worksheet 2 are shown only for grouped evaluation criteria, valuations may be viewed for each individual evaluation criterion in the Hidden Calculations worksheet. Columns A through O of the Hidden Calculations worksheet show the same information that is displayed in Worksheet 2, Valuations. Columns farther to the right (i.e., Columns Q through BK) show the utils (or weight-adjusted rank) of each GSM for each evaluation criterion within each of the evaluation groups. If you sort data in the Hidden Calculations worksheet, the data must be returned to the original order prior to using Worksheets 2 and 6. Alternatively, the Hidden Calculations worksheet can be copied to another worksheet name for sorting. As previously described, utils are calculated from the weights given by the user to different evaluation criteria (entered in Worksheet 1, Evaluation Weights) and to the relative applicability ranks (entered in Worksheet 4, Applicability Ranks). A more detailed description of the Excel equations used to calculate these weight-adjusted ranks (i.e., utils) in the Hidden Calculations worksheet is provided below. Most users are not likely to need this level of detail. Columns Q through T of the Hidden Calculations worksheet show GSM characterization infor- mation from Worksheet 3, Characterization, to provide easy reference when analyzing the valua- tions for GSMs in Columns V through BK. For discussion of weight-adjusted ranks (i.e., utils) in Columns V through BK, the following terms are used: • Rank refers to the numbers entered in Worksheet 4, Applicability Ranks. These numbers indi- cate the relative applicability of each GSM to each evaluation criterion. The maximum accept- able applicability rank is 3. • Specific Criteria refers to the specific evaluation criteria described in Worksheet 1, Evaluation Weights. For example, in the Security Objective group, the specific criteria are to deter, detect, deny, and mitigate, as described in Rows 9 through 12 of Worksheet 1, Evaluation Weights. • Weight refers to the numbers entered in Worksheet 1, Evaluation Weights. These numbers indicate the relative weight given to different evaluation criteria. The maximum weight is five. There are two types of weights: group weights and specific weights (described below). • Group Weight refers to the five weights entered in Rows 75 to 79 of Worksheet 1, Evaluation Weights, for the criteria groups of security objectives, non-security effects, 33 CFR Compli- ance, Security Locations, and Threat Type. • Sub-Group Weight refers to the average weight of each of the three sub-groups within the Threat Type group. These sub-groups are Delivery of Explosive/Incendiary, Act of Force, and Deliver WMD. 20 Part I: Guide for Evaluating Security Measures for the U.S. Ferry System

• Specific Weight refers to the weights entered in Rows 9 to 69 of Worksheet 1, Evaluation Weights. These weights are for specific criteria listed within each evaluation group. For exam- ple, in the Security Objective group, specific criteria are deter, detect, deny, and mitigate. 3.9.2 Calculation of Weight-Adjusted Ranks The general method for calculation of weight-adjusted ranks is to multiply rank by weight. The (rank)×(weight) is expressed as a fraction of the maximum possible rank and average group or sub- group weight and then multiplied by the total possible utils for the specific criteria (i.e., the maxi- mum group or sub-group utils divided by the number of specific criteria in the group or sub-group). Maximum Group Utils are shown in Row 7 (Cells V7, AA7, AF7, and AL7) and Row 5 (Cell BG5) of the Hidden Calculations worksheet. The Excel equations for these cells are shown in Table 2. Maximum group utils are calculated as the product of the total utils (i.e., 100) and the fraction of the group weight divided by the summation of all group weights. Thus, when all group weights are equal, there are 20 possible utils for each group. When all group weights are not equal (the more common case), some groups will have maximum possible utils above 20, and others below 20. Maximum Threat Type Sub-Group Utils are shown in Cells AZ7, BH6, and BK7. The Excel equations for these cells are shown in Table 2. The three sub-groups within the Threat Type group Chapter 3: The Tool 21 Cell Excel Equation Explanation V7 =('1. Evaluation Weights'!$H$75/SUM('1. Evaluation Weights'!$H$75:$H$79))*100 Maximum possible utils for the Group, Security Objectives, given the weights provided on Sheet 1, Evaluation Weights. AA7 =('1. Evaluation Weights'!$H$76/SUM('1. Evaluation Weights'!$H$75:$H$79))*100 Maximum possible utils for the Group, Non-Security Effects, given the weights provided on Sheet 1, Evaluation Weights. AF7 =('1. Evaluation Weights'!$H$77/SUM('1. Evaluation Weights'!$H$75:$H$79))*100 Maximum possible utils for the Group, 33 CFR Compliance, given the weights provided on Sheet 1, Evaluation Weights. AL7 =('1. Evaluation Weights'!$H$78/SUM('1. Evaluation Weights'!$H$75:$H$79))*100 Maximum possible utils for the Group, Security Locations, given the weights provided on Sheet 1, Evaluation Weights. BG5 =('1. Evaluation Weights'!$H$79/SUM('1. Evaluation Weights'!$H$75:$H$79))*100 Maximum possible utils for the Group, Threat Type, given the weights provided on Sheet 1, Evaluation Weights. AZ7 =(AVERAGE(AX10:BC10))/(AVERAGE( AVERAGE($AX$10:$BC$10),AVERAGE ($BD$10:$BH$10),AVERAGE($BI$10:$ BK$10)))*($BG$5/3) Maximum possible utils for the Threat Type sub-group, Deliver Explosive/Incendiary, given the weights provided. BH6 =(AVERAGE(BD10:BH10))/(AVERAGE( AVERAGE($AX$10:$BC$10),AVERAGE ($BD$10:$BH$10),AVERAGE($BI$10:$ BK$10)))*($BG$5/3) Maximum possible utils for the Threat Type sub-group, Act of Force, given the weights provided. BK7 =(AVERAGE(BI10:BK10))/(AVERAGE(A VERAGE($AX$10:$BC$10),AVERAGE( $BD$10:$BH$10),AVERAGE($BI$10:$B K$10)))*($BG$5/3) Maximum possible utils for the Threat Type sub-group, WMD Delivery, given the weights provided. Table 2. Equations for calculations of maximum possible utils.

22 Part I: Guide for Evaluating Security Measures for the U.S. Ferry System Table 3. Equations for weight-adjusted ranks (i.e., util valuations). Column Group Excel Equation (in upper right cell) Explanation V • • Y Security Objective =(('4. Applicability Ranks'!F11*V$10)/ ((AVERAGE($V$10:$Y$10))*3)) *($V$7/4) AA • • AD Non-Security Effects =(('4. Applicability Ranks'!K11*AA$11)/ ((SUM($AA11:$AD11)/4)*3))* ($AA$8/4) AF • • AJ 33 CFR Compliance =(('4. Applicability Ranks'!P11*AF$11)/ ((SUM($AF11:$AJ11)/5)*3))* ($AF$8/5) AL • • AV Locations =(('4. Applicability Ranks'!V11*AL$11)/ ((SUM($AL11:$AV11)/11)*3))* ($AL$8/11) For each GSM (row) and each specific criterion (column) GSM rank is: 1. Multiplied by the specific weight, 2. Expressed as a fraction of the average specific weight and maximum rank, 3. Multiplied by the maximum group utils divided by the number of criteria in the group. AX • • BC Threat Type – EID Sub- group =(('4. Applicability Ranks'!AH11*AX$11)/ ((SUM($AX11:$BC11)/6)*3))* (($AX$8/3)/6) BD • • BH Threat Type – Act of Force Sub- group =(('4. Applicability Ranks'!AN11*BD$11)/ ((SUM($BD11:$BH11)/5)*3))* (($AX$8/3)/5) BI BJ BK Threat Type – WMD Sub- group =(('4. Applicability Ranks'!AS11*BI$11)/ ((SUM($BI11:$BK11)/3)*3))* (($AX$8/3)/3) For each GSM (row) and each specific criterion (column) GSM rank is: 1. Multiplied by the specific weight, 2. Expressed as a fraction of the average specific weight and maximum rank, 3. Multiplied by the maximum sub-group utils divided by the number of criteria in the sub- group. (i.e., Delivery of Explosives/Incendiaries, Acts of Force, and WMD Delivery) are allotted portions of the maximum group utils (show in Cell BG5) based on the sub-group’s average weight. More specifically, the maximum group utils is divided by 3 (i.e., the number of sub-groups), and multi- plied by the fraction of the sub-group average weight divided by the average of the average sub- group weights for all three sub-groups. Thus, sub-groups are weighted according to their average sub-group weight and are not affected by varied numbers of specific criteria within each sub-group. Rows 11 and higher (Columns V through BK) display weight-adjusted ranks for each GSM and specific evaluation criteria. Sample equations in these columns are shown in Table 3. There are three parts to the equation for weight-adjusted ranks: 1. Apply the specific weight to the rank—that is, (Rank)×(Specific Weight). 2. Express (Rank)×(Specific Weight) as a fraction of the maximum rank and the average specific weight. This makes it so specific weights are relative within their group—if all specific weights in a group are the same, it makes no difference if the specific weights are all reported as 1 or 5. 3. Multiply the above fraction by the maximum possible utils for the specific criteria. This is the maximum possible utils for the group (as in Row 7) given the evaluation weights provided, divided by the number of specific criteria within the group (e.g., 4 in the Security Objective group). For the Threat Type group, the maximum possible utils for the sub-group is used in place of the group maximum utils.

Characteristics of the U.S. Ferry System P A R T I I