Cover Image

Not for Sale

View/Hide Left Panel
Click for next page ( 3

The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement

Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page 2
CHAPTER 1 Introduction 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

OCR for page 2
4 Part I: Guide for Evaluating Security Measures for the U.S. Ferry System 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.