K9 Units in Public Transportation: A Guide for Decision Makers (2002)

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.

1 SECTION 1: INTRODUCTION The nation’s largest 100 public transportation systems provide over 8.4 billion passenger trips each year. This figure represents approximately 87 percent of all trips taken on public transportation. In an industry with over 7,000 operating systems, these systems comprise less than two-tenths of one percent of the total. With so much of the nation’s riding public concentrated on so few public transportation systems, the actions of these systems have significant implications for public safety. To this end, the largest 100 transportation systems have developed security programs to integrate sworn law enforcement personnel and non-sworn security professionals into their operations. Since the 1970s, executive management, public transportation police departments, contracted law enforcement, and non-sworn security services have actively investigated a variety of methods for improving security and emergency preparedness. During the 1980s and early 1990s, 16 transportation agencies developed canine (K9) programs. Now, only 12 public transportation systems have K9 programs in operation. These systems are listed below: ❐ Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART); ❐ Chicago Transit Authority (CTA); ❐ Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA); ❐ Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority (MARTA); ❐ Metropolitan Transportation Authority of Harris County (Houston METRO); ❐ New York City Transit (NYCT); ❐ New Jersey Transit (NJ Transit); ❐ Niagara Frontier Transportation Authority (NFTA); ❐ Port Authority Transit Hudson (PATH); ❐ Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority (SEPTA); ❐ Tri-County Rail; and ❐ Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority (WMATA). These systems use K9 units to patrol their own assets and areas of responsibility. On average, these units deploy between two to four teams. Houston METRO has one narcotics team but is able to operate successfully through strong ties with other local law enforcement agencies. CTA, SEPTA, and MBTA have large units, staffing three shifts with anywhere from 7 to 16 teams. SEPTA staffs eight K9 teams, but maintains 18 dogs. Some SEPTA teams deploy two dogs, affording them additional capability and more rapid response. MARTA and NFTA not only patrol their rail assets, but also work in local airports performing drug and explosive detection. WMATA and BART have both created innovative partnerships with federal law enforcement agencies to support the protection of critical infrastructure in their service areas and to secure tunnels and

2 elevated structures. All interviewed public transportation systems also support calls for assistance from local law enforcement. Since 1996, four public transportation systems have disbanded their K9 programs. These are: ❐ MTA Long Island Rail Road; ❐ MTA Metro-North Commuter Railroad; ❐ Northern Indiana Commuter Transportation District (NICTD); and ❐ Port Authority Transit Commission. In three of these cases, changes in management brought new philosophies that did not support the costs and legal or insurance liabilities associated with canine programs. In the last instance, the transportation system’s only canine had to be removed from service, and a decision was made not to replace it. In all cases, management review clearly indicated that these programs were not meeting expectations. In an era in which the number of canine programs nationwide is growing every year, 25 percent of canine programs in public transportation have been discontinued. This finding emphasizes the challenges of building and sustaining these units in the transportation environment, and in developing documented measures of performance that survive transitions in management and personnel. RESEARCH ACTIVITY This Guide surveys the use of K9 teams to support patrol, narcotics, and explosives detection capabilities in the public transportation environment. It highlights key steps required to develop and deploy effective K9 units and provides tools to support transportation executives, police, and operations personnel in evaluating whether this type of resource is appropriate for their security and emergency-preparedness programs. This Guide reflects the results of a research program involving more than 40 organizations that specialize in the training, certification, and deployment of trained service dogs. ❐ Detailed interviews were performed with 8 of the 12 public transportation systems currently deploying K9 units. Two additional systems were able to participate in less extensive interviews with the research team, and the two remaining systems were unable to participate for security reasons. Interviews were also performed with representatives from all four systems that disbanded their K9 programs. ❐ The National Passenger Railroad Corporation (AMTRAK) also participated in an interview with the research team including representatives from both AMTRAK headquarters and regional offices.

3 ❐ Federal agencies interviewed for this project include the Transportation Security Administration (TSA); the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA); the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms (ATF); the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI); the Department of Defense Military Working Dog Center at Lackland Air Force Base; and the Naval Criminal Investigative Service. Combined, these agencies deploy more than 2,000 K9s around the world for infrastructure protection, explosives detection, and to support military operations. ❐ Certifying agencies including the United States Police Canine Association (USPCA), the North American Police Work Dog Association (NAPWDA), the National Narcotic Detector Dog Association (NNDDA), and the National Police Canine Association (NPCA) also participated in the research and shared their experiences in evaluating the performance of K9 teams. ❐ Fifteen vendors, providing a range of dog selection, training, and contract services, were also consulted to obtain their perspectives on the use of K9s in public transportation. Since the early 1980s, vendors have become critical links in the development of local law enforcement K9 programs. Nationwide, more than 300 municipal law enforcement agencies use vendor programs to provide dogs, to support dog selection as well as dog and handler training, and to evaluate the performance of K9 teams. ORGANIZATION OF GUIDE This Guide is composed of six sections designed to support evaluation of the K9 option in the public transportation environment and to describe the steps involved in setting up (or expanding) a K9 unit. Section 1 identifies those transportation systems with active K9 programs, describes the research activity performed to develop the Guide, outlines its organization, and introduces key terms. Section 2 provides a description of how K9 units are used in public transportation and identifies the pros and cons associated with these programs, as reported by the agencies participating in the project research. Section 3 provides an overview of how K9 units are currently deployed by the eight public transportation agencies and AMTRAK that participated in in-depth interviews for this Guide. Section 4 presents K9 unit proposal preparation guidelines and considerations. This section describes the state of practice regarding key issues to consider when developing or expanding a transportation system’s K9 program. Section 5 outlines the steps required to establish a K9 unit in the transportation environment, with an emphasis on the identification of resources to support the

4 program; the selection of trainers, handlers, and service dogs; and the development of training programs, evaluation programs, and deployment schedules to best utilize this resource. Section 6 presents further research on the use of K9 units to support explosives detection (ED). This section provides supplemental information on how this function can be integrated into the transportation K9 program or supplied by contracts with qualified vendors. Key elements discussed include the merits of the ED capability for transportation operators, sample certification standards for ED, requirements for training with explosives, and the potential role of vendor services in support of transportation operations. The appendixes provide information documenting the project research and also support the development of policies and procedures at public transportation systems. Appendix A provides a complete listing of the agencies that supported the preparation of this Guide. Appendix B presents the Structured Interview Guide used to direct the telephone interviews for the research. Appendix C provides a brief summary of overall findings from these interviews. Appendix D provides a fact sheet describing the Transportation Security Administration’s (TSA) Explosives Detection Canine Team Program, used to train, certify, and deploy K9 units at the nation’s airports. Appendix E provides a summary of grant programs administered through the Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Assistance. Appendix F contains a sample selection test for candidate service dogs working in the transportation environment. This test is based on standards developed by the U.S. Military Working Dog Program and the Royal Canadian Mounted Police Canine Program. Appendix G contains a Sample General Order prepared for this Guide. It combines key features of several orders submitted to the research team by the interviewed transportation agencies and vendors. As with all materials in this Guide, the Sample General Order is intended only to stimulate public transportation system evaluation of key issues to be addressed. It is not intended to be prescriptive or to mandate any specific practice. Appendix H provides sample performance objectives used to support ongoing evaluation of K9 programs in the State of New Jersey.

5 Appendix I presents sample certification standards prepared for this Guide, based on results and recommendations of interviews with public transportation personnel. These standards can be used to establish evaluation criteria for K9 team performance in the transportation environment.

6 This page has been left intentionally blank.