Communication of Threats: A Guide (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.

APPENDIX C: SURVEY INSTRUMENT AND TRANSMITTAL LETTER SURVEY INSTRUMENT BACKGROUND AND CONTACT INFORMATION This survey is being conducted to support a research task order from the Transit Cooperative Research Program (TCRP), a unit of the Transportation Research Board (TRB) of the National Academy of Sciences, and fits within a larger effort to conduct research in responding to the transportation sector's homeland security needs. Survey results will be reviewed to determine the viability of developing surface transportation threat protocols and corresponding threat dissemination systems. The research team for this effort is comprised of John Sullivan, Matthew Devost and James Kirkhope. Please submit completed surveys to: Transportation Communication Survey c/o Terrorism Research Center, Inc. (TRC) 5765-F Burke Centre Parkway, PMB 331 Burke, VA 22015 email: kirkhope@terrorism.com fax: 703-935-2666 Purpose of the Survey The purpose of this survey is to evaluate the requirements of the transit environment to develop a series of protocols for event reporting and profiles for how information should be distributed. Several transit operators are currently participating in this effort with a goal to derive a series of working protocols and information flow diagrams detailing when and how threat information should be disseminated and how to recognize trends that might be indicative of a coordinated attack against multiple transit systems. (This process used for protocol development mirrors an earlier effort utilized by law enforcement agencies to develop protocols for response and dissemination of terrorism threat data). Our goal is to determine the current information sharing mechanisms and threat information needs of transit operators and security (including police) providers. The survey will also attempt to determine preferences for system design, interoperability, and information surety (operational security). Survey Instructions Please fill out this brief survey as completely as possible and return by Tuesday, May 7, 2002. Page 27

Section 1 - Background Information Contact Person/Survey Respondent: Transit Operator: Address: Phone: Fax: Email: Web Address: Transportation System Includes (check all that apply): Airport Bus Ferry Highway/bridge Light Rail/Subway/etc. Paratransit Port Rail Other – please describe: Does Transport System have its own police department? (Circle one) Yes No Does Transport System have its own security department? (Circle one) Yes No Estimated Number of Threat Warnings: 1998: 1999: 2000: 2001: Estimated Number of Actual Threat Incidents (to which personnel were dispatched): 1998: 1999: 2000: 2001: Section 2 – Assessment of Current Practices Current Sources of Threat Communications (check as many as apply) Please rate the importance of each type of transmission to your operation. (Scale of 1-7 with 1 least important and 7 most important): BOLO (be on the look out)/Wanted persons National Crime Information Center Broadcast of attacks (open source) News reportage (open source intelligence) Current threats (advisories, alerts and warnings) NIPC FBI InfraGard Office of Intelligence and Security FRA State law enforcement FTA Training opportunities (i.e., WMD or Page 28

counter-terrorism training Homeland Security Advisory System (HSAS) Threat level TTPs - Advisories on terrorist tactics, techniques and procedures Internet (listserves, bulletin board, etc.) USDOT Lessons learned Local emergency management Local law enforcement Other (specify) Have you been briefed on the Homeland Security Advisory System (HSAS)? (Circle one) Yes No Have you integrated the HSAS into your existing threat communication protocol? (Circle one below) Yes – if so, how? No Methods (rate timeliness: Scale 1 – 7 and Utility: Scale 1 – 7) 1=slow/not useful 7=fast/extremely useful Threat Communication Medium Timeliness Utility Cell Phone Email Fax Line Phone Pager/Blackberry Surface Mail/Postal Service Do you utilize current threat advisories to modify operational status of the system or enhance/modify security posture? (Circle one below) Yes – if so, how? No Do you coordinate your security posture with proximate or connecting transit systems? (Circle one below) Yes – if so, how? No Who/What position is responsible for determining threat and level in your system? Page 29

Section 3 – Assessment of Operational Needs (Preferences) For any proposed transportation threat communication system, please rate the importance of the following: (Scale of 1-7 with 1 least important and 7 most important): message vetting and authentication historical evaluation (i.e., for trend analysis) message archiving, peer-to-peer communication. To what media should a new integrated transportation threat communication system link? (check all that apply): Cellular systems Internet Pagers Other (please specify): Would a web-based system for threat communication meet your needs? (Circle one) Yes No If Yes, Should there be a public and restricted access side Yes No Should there be tiers of access (levels of access for types of personnel, e.g. one level for transit operations, a higher level for police, etc.) If Yes, please provide suggestions: Yes No Please suggest what kind of password/user identification is desirable: Please provide suggestions on the following topics for design of a new integrated transportation threat communication system: System design Interoperability Information surety (operational security) What level of security Current information sharing mechanisms Page 30

Threat information needs Comments/Suggestions for Improved Communication of Threats: Questions to Survey Administrators: Date survey completed:________________ For clarifications please contact James Kirkhope: (Tel: 703-380-9194), (Fax:703-935-2666), kirkhopes@terrorism.com TRANSMITTAL LETTER Dear Sir: We are conducting a survey to evaluate the requirements of the transit environment to develop a series of protocols for event reporting and profiles for how information should be distributed. This survey is supporting a research task order from the Transit Cooperative Research Program (TCRP), a unit of the Transportation Research Board (TRB) of the National Academy of Sciences. Additionally, it fits within a larger effort to conduct research in responding to the transportation sector's homeland security needs. Several transit operators are currently participating in this effort with a goal to derive a series of working protocols and information flow diagrams detailing when and how threat information should be disseminated and how to recognize trends that might be indicative of a coordinated attack against multiple transit systems. (This process used for protocol development mirrors an earlier effort utilized by law enforcement agencies to develop protocols for response and dissemination of terrorism threat data). Our goal is to determine the current information sharing mechanisms and threat information needs of transit operators and security (including police) providers. The survey will also attempt to determine preferences for system design, interoperability, and information surety (operational security). Survey results will be reviewed to determine the viability of developing surface transportation threat protocols and corresponding threat dissemination systems. The research team for this effort is comprised of John Sullivan, Matthew Devost and James Kirkhope (survey point of contact). Please feel free to contact us with any questions or comments. I will follow up shortly with a phone call to confirm receipt of the attached survey. Page 31

Sincerely, James Kirkhope Transportation Communication Survey Coordinator Terrorism Research Center Tel: 730-380-9194 Fax: 703-935-2666 email: kirkhope@terrorism.com Page 32