1 FY 2009 Port Security Grant Program Outreach Coast Guard Headquarters Domestic Port Security...

1

FY 2009 Port Security Grant Program Outreach

Coast Guard Headquarters

Domestic Port Security Evaluation Division(CG-5142)

Assessment, Integration, and Risk Management Directorate

2Port Security Grant Program Teleconference 5/18/05

CGHQ Domestic Port Security Evaluation Division (CG-5142)

Division DirectorCaptain Hishon

Assessments Branch Analysis Branch (MSRAM) Port Security Grants Branch

Deputy DirectorCDR Brown

DHS liaison


Outline of Presentation

History, Outreach and Current Priorities

Risk, Port Area Groupings, Funding

Fiduciary Agent/Port Wide Risk Mitigation/Management Plans

FY09 Options Group I/II, III/All Other Ports

Admin/Review Process

Good Practices

Dates/POCs


Why does PSGP Exist?

Majority of US infrastructure owned by state, local, and private sector

Part of larger strategy of supporting homeland security (HLS) preparedness

Implements objectives addressed in laws, national strategies, and plans

To quote National Strategy for HLS, a strategic objective is to deter terrorist threat by decreasing likelihood of success of a terrorist attack on critical infrastructure


History of PSGP Important to emphasize: FEMA administers programs, USCG provides SME

Program initiated FY02 by MARAD, original goal for CG was MTSA compliance, gates/guns/gadgets

FY2003: Urban Area Security Initiative (UASI) port security grant program coordinated with TSA,

FY2005: DHS legacy office of State and Local Government Coordination & Preparedness (SLGCP) coordinated, focused on underwater, small craft, and vehicle borne improvised explosive device (VBIED) detection capabilities for ferries

FY 2006: administered thru DHS Grants and Training; laid foundation for port-wide risk management vice focus on individual port entities

FY 2007: SAFE PORT Act expanded pool of eligible applicants to include all entities covered under an Area Maritime Security Plan (AMSP)

FY 2007 Supplement (FY07A): August 2007; introduced concept of Fiduciary Agent (FA) as single entity to apply for funding on behalf of Group I/II ports; any projects funded had to support a Port-Wide Risk Mitigation Plan (PWRMP)

FY 2008: gave Group I/II ports option to continue with round 7A FA or “opt out” and compete with Group III ports


Outreach--- FY09 Guidance Development

Consulted with American Association of Port Authorities (AAPA)

Coast Guard Area Maritime Security Committees

Fiduciary Agents


09 Investment Strategy and Priorities

Overall Investment Strategy:

-Risk-based funding

-Regional security cooperation (emphasis on port wide risk management plan started FY07 supplemental)

FY09 PSGP Priorities:

-Enhancing Maritime Domain Awareness

-Enhancing IED and WMD prevention, protection, response, recovery capabilities

-Training and Exercises

-Transportation Worker Identification Credential (TWIC) implementation efforts


Ferry Priorities

IED and VBIED prevention, protection, response, and recovery

Mitigation of other risks

Use of canines

Mobile technology for explosives/other threats detection

Perimeter security capabilities

Emergency response capabilities if ferry used as weapon against infrastructure

Training for ferry operators

Public awareness training


FY 2009 Key Changes from 08

Expand Improvised Explosive Device (IED) priority to include enhancing WMD prevention/response capabilities (DNDO info included)-p.6, 64

Fiduciary Agent guidance updated-p. 11, 17-19 Cost-sharing requirements updates-p. 16-17 Allowable Construction-p. 42-43 Explosive Detection Canine Team Operational Packages

(OPACKS)-p. 44-45


How Port Area Groups are Determined

Port Consequence List (PCL)

FEMA adds a series of economic “factors” for specific target vulnerabilities and consequence from both “open sources” and Coast Guard MSRAM data

Results in a ranked risk listing

Risk of individual ports then aggregated by geographic region, individual ports who share risk

The resulting list is the basis for Group I, II, III and All Other Ports as determined by DHS Leadership

11

FY09 FEMA’s PSGP RISK FORMULA

Total Port Risk

National Infrastructure

Index

Economic Index

National Security

Index

Population Index

Threat (20%)(HITRAC)

Vulnerability & Consequence (80%)

+

x

++


Significant Changes to Port Risk Formula

FEMA formula changes annually

-Oil terminals moved from National Security Index to Economic Index as petroleum deliveries

-National Security Index now includes military personnel as opposed to military base counts

-Change in volume or type of cargo

-Annual validated MSRAM data


FY09 Port Area Groupings

91 named port areas:

- 7 Group I, 48 Group II, 36 Group III

Reference pgs 14-16 of FY09 PSGP guidance

Groups represent 95% total international waterborne commerce in U.S.

Ports aggregated by common waterways, shared risk


Risk drives Groupings

Changes to port groups- Continued regionalization of planning

Allows for development of 8 (new Group II port areas) Port Wide Risk Mitigation/Management Plans

- 47% of Risk represented in Group I- 93.5% of aggregate risk allocated in Groups I & II- 8 port areas new to Group II- 21 port areas new to Group III

All Other Ports (AOP) can receive funding from their geographically proximate higher Group if projects have regional impact across entire port area, but can’t receive funding from both higher group and AOP allocation


Comparison of FY08, FY09 PSGP Funding Levels

FY08 FY09 Delta

Group I 210,649,989 210,649,989 0

Group II 139,049,701 140,014,000 964,299

Group III 19,150,310 17,592,011

(1,558,299)

All Other Ports 19,150,000 15,344,000

(3,806,000)

Ferries 5,600,000 5,000,000 (600,000)

Total 388,600,000 388,600,000


A Refresher: The Fiduciary Agent

The FA can be a member of the AMSC, non-profit, or entity approved in conjunction with the Federal Maritime Security Coordinator (FMSC), and approved by FEMA

FA coordinates development of a Port Wide Risk Mitigation/Management Plan

-ensures future applications “buy-down risk” per the plan

-Use up to 20% of funds to develop plan

-Retain 3% for management/administrative costs

FA is responsible to AMSC and other plan stakeholders for utilizing grant funds as directed by committee, not sole decision maker

-Acts as principal POC w/FEMA for application, management, financial reporting

-Remaining funds expended to implement plan’s findings and supporting projects during timeframe (up to 36 months)


A Refresher: Port Wide Risk Mitigation/Management Plans

Plan should develop strategy and framework

-for investing in vulnerability reductions

-resiliency enhancements Establishes a prioritized 5-year planning cycle Request funding through future grant applications Structure deliverables so not redundant


FY09 Group I/II Options

For 09, Group I and II port areas that were also Group I or II during FY08 will have option to:

1. Continue with current FA; or

2. Select a new FA for FY 09 projects.

Ports newly identified within Group II (previously Group III, all other ports), can either select to use the FA process, or opt out and compete w/ Group III/all other ports

Must certify their intention to opt out to FEMA and CGHQ (CG-5142)


FY09 Group III/All Other Ports

Group III and All Other Ports submit investment justifications, budgets, all other requirements per previous FY09 guidelines. Individual port entities must comply w/all FEMA programmatic requirements


Investment Justifications, Budgets, MOAs, etc

Reference pages 24-36 of guidance

Also FEMA promulgated PSGP Plan Implementation Guidance for Fiduciary Agents


Allowable Costs for FY09

OPACKs

-In FY09, introduction of OPACKs-Explosive Detection Canine Team Operational Packages—only authorized for Groups I, II and ferries

-Newly obtained canine and handler


Allowable Costs for FY09 (con’t)

Construction

-FY09: Allowable Construction Costs:

1. Maritime Domain Awareness Fusion Centers

2. Maritime Security Operations Centers

3. Port Security Operations Centers

4. Port Security Emergency Communications Centers

5. Any building enhancing access control to port area


FY 2009 PSGP Matching Funds

Public Sector - 25% of total project costs (CASH or IN-KIND)

-25% applies to regionalized projects submitted by FA in that the FA represents Area Maritime Security Committee, a public entity

-Private Sector - 50% of the total project costs for each project. (CASH or IN-KIND)

-Consortia representing federally regulated entities: 25% CASH or IN-KIND

-Construction must be a 25% cash-match for public, 50% cash match for private

Exception: No match – projects costing $25,000.00 or less. National and/or regional corporations submitting 11 or more

projects throughout their system must meet the 50% match for projects 11, 12, etc.


FY 2009 PSGP Field Review Process Group I/II

Three steps:

-Initial Screening (Grants Program Directorate)

-Field Review (FMSC, AMSC, MARAD)

-National Review (National Review Panel)

FEMA conducts initial screening of all projects

-Group I and II ports using an FA, the FA in conjunction with other field reviewers will ensure projects are in compliance with respective Port Wide Risk Mitigation/Management Plans

-FY07 supplemental/FY08 PSG projects awaiting approval, groups I and II, Investment Justifications submitted per approved Risk Mitigation/Management Plan


FY 2009 PSGP Field Review Process Group III, All Other Ports

Group III, All Other Ports, and ports new to Group II from III and opting out of FA process will have each application scored for compliance with the four core grant program criteria listed in FY08 PSGP Guidelines

FMSCs assign a total score compilation; with all proposals received from each port being ranked from highest to lowest in terms of their priority and contributions to risk reduction and cost effectiveness. Recommendations for full/partial funding, together with candid comments as to applicant’s ability to manage the project.

FMSCs are to make specific notation if other entities within the port region have similar capabilities and the need for or lack of redundancy.

All applications will undergo a final review by the National Review Panel (NRP)


Harris County Ship Channel Security District(HCSCSD)—Good Practices

Public – Private partnership

Improve security in Houston ship channel area

System-wide security approach

List of projects created to improve security in Houston ship channel

HCSCSD is mechanism to allow for county, facilities and others to fund local share of port security grants

Also provides mechanism to fund operating expenses of security projects

HCSCSD also provides mechanism to implement ship channel security plan


FY 2009 PSGP IMPORTANT DATES

Date Milestone

November 5, 2008 Guidance Released

November 12-December 19, 2008 AMSC Outreach

January 13, 2009 1159 PM EST Applications Due (Tuesday 1/13/09 1159 PM EST)

January 14-23, 2009 Initial Review

January 26-30, 2009 Field Review Preparation

February 2-20, 2009 Field Review

February 23-24, 2009 Field Review QA/QC

February 25-27, 2009 National Review Panel Preparation

March 2-4, 2009 National Review Panel

March 5-6, 2009 Finalize National Review Panel Recommendations

March 9 through April 9, 2009 Award Determinations/Leadership Approval/Roll-Out

April 10, 2009 Allocations Announced


FY 2009 PSGP

REFERENCES/POCs

FY2009 Port Security Grant Program Guidelines.

FEMA POC list (next slide)

CAPT John Marks [email protected]

- Mr. Randall Barr [email protected]


MTN/A

WYN/A

IDN/A

WA26

OR10

NVN/A

UTN/A

CA46

AZN/A

NDN/A

SDN/A

NEN/A

CON/A

NMN/A

TX90

OK4

KSN/A

AR2

LA66

MO7

IAN/A

MN13

WI10

IL7

IN8

KY12

TN10

MS12

AL11

FL39

SC12

NC14

WV

OH8

MI10

NY20

PA31

MD8

DE9

NJ11

CT13

RI10

MA19

ME15

VT

NH5

AK16

HI8

VA12

Guam: 2Northern Mariana Islands: 2American Samoa:

DC:Puerto Rico: 7

Port Security Grant Program State Assignments

Virgin Island: 5

X

IX

VI

IV

III

I

I

II

V

VII

VIII

Tier I Port Area

Jackie [email protected]

Duane [email protected]

Kathleen [email protected]

Venita [email protected]

CT/NY9

GA13

IL/IN1

NY/NJ47

WV4

Alex [email protected]


Way Forward

Read FY09 Guidance for more details If required--Identify a Fiduciary Agent if required to do so If required--Develop a Port Wide Risk Mitigation/Management Plan

and/or optional Business Continuity/Resumption of Trade plan Submit applications, investment justifications, budgets, and other

required documents to FEMA Work with FEMA during all phases of grant application process Direction in which Grants are headed: allocating grant money based

on extent to which applications support 37 DHS Target Capabilities, capabilities tied back to National Preparedness Guidelines

Ensure FMSC/AMSC collaboration to ensure MSRAM data accurate!


Questions?


BACKUP SLIDES


FY 2009 MSRAM Updates MSRAM=Maritime Security Risk Analysis Model Used by COTPs, AMSCs to assess risk to port infrastructure, facilities,

vessels, etc DHS formula: Risk = Threat x Vulnerability x Consequence Updates:

-Increased risk profile scope with more target classes (emphasis on barges/vessels)

-More confidence in Secondary Economic consequences

-Updated threat input from USCG Intelligence Coordination Center (ICC)

-Higher risk threshold/cutoff point for meaningful risk

-Assessment and review training for Port Security Specialists-Districts, Sectors, Areas, update analysis tools (i.e. blast calculator)


MSRAM Scenario Elements Comprehensive targets classes & attack modes

MSRAM Design is Based on

Terrorist Attack Modes against Types of Targets

21

National Critical Infrastructure and Key Resources/Assets (CI/KA) Sectors

Critical Infrastructure1. Agriculture & Food

2. Water (WTS)

3. Public Health

4. Emergency Services

5. Defense Industrial Base

6. Information Technology

7. Telecommunications

8. Energy

9. Transportation

10. Banking and Finance

11. Chemical & Hazardous Materials

12. Postal and Shipping

Key Resources/assets1. National Monuments & Icons

2. Nuclear Power & Materials

3. Dams

4. Commercial Facilities

5. Government Facilities

HSPD 7:

Target / Asset Attack ModeScenario

Attack Modes address the full range of DHS Attack

Modes (WMD)

Risk = Threat * Consequence * Vulnerability DATA


LIK

EL

IHO

OD

(T

hrea

t *

Vul

nera

bilit

y)

CDC Facility – Car/Truck Bomb

Cruise Terminal – Car/Truck Bomb

HighLow

LOW

HIGH

MSRAM creates a Risk-Based Risk-Informed Security Profile

Cruise Ship - Boat Bomb

National Icon – Boat Bomb

Bridge – Attack By Hijacked Vessel

High Capacity Ferry Terminal- Car/Truck Bomb

Petroleum Refinery – Car/Truck Bomb

Bridge - Boat Bomb

Nuclear Power Plant – Car/Truck Bomb

High Capacity Ferry – Boat Bomb

Ferry 150 -1000 – Boat Bomb

Cruise Ship - Car/Truck Bomb

Cruise Ship – Attack By Hijacked Vessel

LPG Tanker - Boat Bomb

LPG Tanker – Stand-Off Weapon

Oil Tanker – Boat Bomb

High Capacity Ferry - Car/Truck Bomb

CONSEQUENCE


MSRAM change case supports Risk Mitigation Decision Strategies


MSRAM References/POCs- LCDR Brady Downs 202-372-1173- LT Dave Dixon 202-372-1176- LT Tyana Thayer 202-372-1178- LT Eric Taquechel 202-372-1185- Mr. Gerald DelRosario 202-372-2609

HOMEMPORT Customer Service - [email protected]

MSRAM HELP DESK – [email protected]


PRND Equipment and Costs DHS SVSS recommends and Domestic Nuclear Detection Office (DNDO) supports a layered defense strategy

that could include hand-held or back-pack radiation detectors, Radio-Isotope Identifying Devices (RIID), boat/vehicle mounted systems, and permanently installed detection systems.

- Current hand-held device average costs are $1-3K per unit- RIID average costs are between $10-25K- Back-pack type device average costs are between $15-$30K

Vehicle and boat mounted device costs are not as well defined, as these are not as commonly used as other devices. Well-tested systems are not yet commercially available.

- Boat and vehicle mounted systems are larger, more sophisticated devices with increased capabilities, and cost significantly more then human portable detection systems.

Additional Information on preventative rad/nuc detection (PRND) equipment can be found at www.rkb.us.


Terrorist Indicator Handbook

5142 awaiting funding for Terrorist Indicator Handbook

-Distributed during last year’s outreach

-Overall goal: a guide to help security managers identify locations and activities around their facilities that might be indicators of terrorist activity.

1 FY 2009 Port Security Grant Program Outreach Coast Guard Headquarters Domestic Port Security...

Documents

Transcript of 1 FY 2009 Port Security Grant Program Outreach Coast Guard Headquarters Domestic Port Security...