GSA's Security Strategy [Forum]
Michael S McGill · eScholarship (California Digital Library) · 2003
Forum GSA's Security Strategy T h e process we follow w i t h any one o f our client agencies is, first o f all, to conduct a security assessment or to determine the level of threat that applies to a given b u i l d i n g . T h i s is based on several factors, the most i m p o r t a n t o f w h i c h is the n u m b e r o f federal employees i n the b u i l d i n g . I f there are m o r e than 450 employees, then i n most cases i t is rated at secu r i t y level four or higher. I n a d d i t i o n , i f an agency is a very h i g h - v i s i b i l i t y law enforcement related o r g a n i z a t i o n , such as the Bureau o f A l c o h o l , T o b a c c o and Firearms ( w h i c h was the target in O k l a h o m a C i t y ) , i t could also be level o f security four even i f there were less than 450 employees at the site. T h e n we assess the kinds o f threats that are presented at each individual b u i l d i n g . F o r example, i f a b u i l d i n g faces a l o n g street that ends at a T - intersection just i n f r o n t of i t , then the risk o f a vehicle b o m b c o m i n g d o w n that l o n g street and b u i l d i n g up a head o f steam and r a m m i n g i n t o the b u i l d i n g is higher than i f the b u i l d i n g were o n the corner o f a four-way intersection. Once we complete that assessment, we take three different types of mea sures. I f it's an existing b u i l d i n g , we l i m i t ourselves to t w o issues. O n e is operational. W e w a n t to m o n i t o r access to the b u i l d i n g , p u t in magne tometers, X - r a y machines, security guards, mavbe television cameras. W e m i g h t , i f there is p u b l i c p a r k i n g , inspect the undercarriages o f cars e n t e r i n g the garage. T h e second is perimeter security. W t a t we were t r y i n g to do, before N C P C moved f o r w a r d w i t h this plan, was to articulate the value o f t r y i n g to find architecturally compatible perimeter security to install on o u r around o u r buildings. O b v i o u s l y , that's expensive. I t depends on appro priations, and we cannot always move as fast as we w o u l d like. I n the i n t e r i m , we may have to install less attractive, t e m p o r a r y barriers. Finally, i f we are u n d e r t a k i n g a major renovation of an existing b u i l d ing, o r c o n s t r u c t i n g a new b u i l d i n g from scratch, we could engage in activities like b u i l d i n g h a r d e n i n g , p r o t e c t i n g against progressive collapse, o r reglazing the w i n d o w s so they d o n ' t shatter and send shards o f glass f l y i n g into the b u i l d i n g . N o w there is the p r o b l e m o f secu r i t y creep. W e ' v e been d o i n g this since 1995, b u t u n t i l Sept. 11 some agencies d i d n o t take security issues that seriously. N o w employees say, W e l l , the people next d o o r have bar riers, w h y d o n ' t we have barriers? even t h o u g h we m i g h t conclude that a b u i l d i n g has n o threat f r o m a vehicle b o m b and doesn't need barriers. Bat Places 15.3 tles sometimes arise between agencies and G S A about w h e t h e r an agency needs the security i t claims i t needs. T h e most significant aspect of the N C P C ] plan is t h a t i t deals w i t h the already-built e n v i r o n m e n t . T h a t is where y o u have problems that are n o t amenable to new construction achiev i n g the perimeter security r e q u i r e ments, unless y o u ' r e n a r r o w i n g the street, w i d e n i n g the sidewalk, things o f that sort. Y o u have to make do w i t h less than o u r guidelines w o u l d sug gest. So how do y o u make do in an attractive way? T h a t ' s the question the plan tries to answer. — Michael S.McGill Michael S. McGill is a senior project manager for the GSA Public Buildings Service in the National Capital Region, and is the GSA Administrators represen tative to the NCPC.