SECURESTATIONQuestionnaire to Identify Operators’ Security Requirements

Background to the SECURESTATION project

The SECURESTATION Project is a major EU project seeking to enhance security, safety and resilience to terrorist attack on passenger stations and terminals.

Aim: To improve passenger station and terminal resilience to terrorist attacks and safety incidents through technologies and methodologies enabling design to reduce the impact of blast, fire and the dispersion of toxic agents on passengers, staff and infrastructure.

The project covers the development of a Risk Assessment Methodology (including simulation results), specifically focusing on passenger stations and terminals (a scenario specific methodology) and the development of a Constructive Design Handbook. These two main outputs will be accompanied by dissemination activity at a transport security conference, and through an extensive End User group.The projectcomprises the assessment of:

  • Acceptability of the security measures identified in the projectby the station and terminal operators/infrastructure managers and key stakeholders;
  • Anticipating possible acceptance, gaps and limitations on the basis ofcurrent regulations, standards and guidelines.

To help us to identify/assessthese security issues, it would be very helpful if you could answer as many as possible of the following questions. Please note:

  • Any information received will be not given to any third party and will be treated in the strictest confidence.
  • We will not publish any details which relate the answers back to you or your organisation
  • You may complete the contact details by only stating your type of organisation (e.g. Mode of transport, infrastructure manager, station operator, government,security organisation, architect, etc.) and your country.

Once completed please return this questionnaire by email to

1of 6

1.Acceptance of Security Options

1.1.What was/were the reason/s for installing the security measures? (more than one answer is allowed)

RS.1 / Formal risk assessment of the security measures of the station/terminal
RS.2 / Conformation to a specific regulation
RS.3 / Reaction to a specific operational problem
RS.4 / Reaction to a problem identified from statistics

Comment or other reasons

1.2.In general which are the most relevant aspects to assess before installing security measures (1: irrelevant; 2: slightly relevant; 3: relevant; 4: highly relevant)?

1 / 2 / 3 / 4
RA.1 / Increase the safety level for users
RA.2 / Impact on people’s health
RA.3 / Comply with legal requirements and constraints
RA.4 / Increase the “real” effectiveness of security measures
RA.5 / Increase the public “perceived” effectiveness of security measures
RA.6 / Increase of the level of service provided to the passengers
RA.7 / Public acceptance of the security measures
RA.8 / Show return of investment of the security measures

Comment

1of 6

1.3.From your perspective for each security measure proposed in the following please tick the three most relevant aspects considered to evaluate the acceptability of the measures before implementing them?

MEASURES / Increase the safety level for users / Impact on people’s health / Comply with legal requirements and constraints / Increase the “real” effectiveness of security measures / Increase the public “perceived” effectiveness of security measures / Increase of the level of service provided to the passengers / Public acceptance of the security measures / Show return of investment of the security measures
Wireless & landline communication system for incident response
Physical Security Information Management (PSIM)
Cyber security means (hardware & software)
Structural reinforcement measures
Materials and coating to mitigate against blast
Increased presence of security personnel (without dogs)
Increased presence of security personnel (with dogs)
Training for employees
Security awareness campaigns
Emergency response/evacuation training
Coordinated security management
Mandatory identification of the external contractors employees
Management of notifications and warnings by employees
Video surveillance (CCTV) & video analytics
Access control system (ACS) for restricted areas
Information & help point / emergency call system (ECS)
Burglar alarm
Fire and smoke detection, suppression and extinguishing
Passenger Information Systems (PIS)
Public Address Systems (PA)
Backup power generation
Emergency lighting
HVAC in mainline stations
Systems for adjusting air conditioning/ventilation in emergency situations
Smoke and fire control ventilation (e.g. sectorization, fire extinguishing system, etc.)
Technologies for passenger & baggage screening
Detection of biological hazards
Detection and contamination of radiological materials
Detection of fire, smoke temperature

2.Task 7.3: Gap analysis: comparing current standards and guidelines to best security practice

2.1.Do you use guidelines or standards for any of the following tasks or activities?

Please tick any that apply and add any activities not listed.

ACTIVITIES
SG.1 / Carrying out risk assessments
SG.2 / Deciding design criteria for new infrastructure
SG.3 / Designing new infrastructure
SG.4 / Re-designing or re-fitting existing infrastructure
SG.5 / Managing security
SG.6 / Developing security protocol (e.g. Evacuation procedures)
SG.7 / Training personnel

Comment

2.2.Which guidelines or standards does your organisation use to address security issues?

CATEGORY / Not Used / Some use / Very usefull
Local/state guidelines
European guidelines
US guidelines
International guidelines (e.g. ISO, UIC
Other

As far as possible, please specify the title, year and author/source of any documents used:

Guidelines or standards used (title, year, author/source)

2.3.Are the following counter-terrorism security issues concerning design of public transport stations / terminals supported by sufficient guidelines or standards?

Please select as many appropriate responses for each issue as are applicable:

SECURITY ISSUE / AREA / I am aware of specific guidelines on this issue / Existing guidance is sufficient and up-to-date / Specific guidelines on this issue are probably necessary / I would welcome more guidance on this issue / There is already sufficient guidance on this topic
Security risk assessment
Fire risk assessment
Terrorism risk assessment
CCTV
Video analytics
Design for personal safety (e.g. open-plan layout, lighting.)
Normal lighting
Emergency lighting
Fire prevention and mitigation design
Fire detection
Fire extinguishing equipment
Structural resilience to fire damage
CBRN detection & mitigation
Mitigation of toxic substance dispersion (ventilation)
Cyber-crime prevention
Dealing with suspicious packages
Planted IED & IID prevention, detection & mitigation
Carried IEDs prevention, detection & mitigation
VBIED mitigation (e.g. vehicle barriers)
Explosive material detection
Design for explosion mitigation (i.e. shock wave deflection & absorption and shrapnel minimisation)
Structural resilience to explosions
Explosion resistant security glazing
Passenger screening
Armed attack(mitigation and evacuation)
Emergency evacuation procedures
Station design for emergency evacuation
Emergency exits
Design of public areas (e.g. waiting room)
Site design for security (e.g. access control, perimeter security, layers of defence)
Avoiding panic in emergency situations
Rail infrastructure sabotage prevention
Emergency response/ training

Comment

3.Any other comments

3.1.Please provide any other comments you would like to add.

4.Data

4.1.Please provide the following info

Name:
Function:
Company:
Type of organisation(1):
System Operated (2)
Infrastructure info (3)
Address:
City:
Country:
Tel:
Fax:
E-mail:
Note:
(1): Governmental, Public, Private, Public Private Partnership
(2) Rail, metro, tram, Light Rail Transit (LRT) or buses
(3) Information over the infrastructure (e.g. number of stations, track km, etc.)
Once completed please return this questionnaire by email to

1of 6