Tightening Security After Navy Yard Tragedy Becomes a Balancing Act

Charles S. Clark, Government Executive
See more stories about...
Charles S. Clark, Government Executive
Dec. 18, 2013, 6:02 a.m.

Les­sons from Septem­ber’s Wash­ing­ton Navy Yard shoot­ings should not in­clude ex­pand­ing met­al-de­tect­or searches, build­ing-se­cur­ity ex­perts said on Tues­day.

But next steps ought to in­volve im­proved train­ing of guards and heightened mon­it­or­ing of agency com­pli­ance with re­com­men­ded risk-mit­ig­a­tion pro­ced­ures.

Of­fi­cials from the Home­land Se­cur­ity and De­fense de­part­ments de­fen­ded the pro­gress that’s been made on build­ing se­cur­ity gov­ern­mentwide since the in­cid­ent, in which men­tally troubled con­tract­or Aaron Alex­is brought weapons in­to Navy Yard Build­ing 197 and murdered 12 co-work­ers.

“In the af­ter­math, it is only nat­ur­al that we won­der if all people en­ter­ing a fed­er­al fa­cil­ity — even em­ploy­ees — should be screened in some way,” said Sen­at­or Tom Carp­er ( D-Del.), chair­man of the Sen­ate Home­land Se­cur­ity and Gov­ern­ment­al Af­fairs Com­mit­tee. “Should we — to bor­row a phrase from Ron­ald Re­agan — ‘trust, but veri­fy?’”

Carp­er framed the hear­ing by ask­ing how agen­cies de­term­ine the threats to their spe­cif­ic fa­cil­it­ies; wheth­er agen­cies are prop­erly as­sess­ing and pri­or­it­iz­ing the vul­ner­ab­il­it­ies; and how they are re­spond­ing to threats as they evolve.

Tough ques­tion­ing came from Sen­at­or Heidi Heitkamp (D-N.D.), who faul­ted both the in­ter­gov­ern­ment­al body ad­vising agen­cies on im­prov­ing se­cur­ity and the qual­ity of train­ing of primar­ily con­tract guards in con­front­ing act­ive shoot­ers. “There doesn’t seem to be a lot of co­ordin­a­tion and when there is, there’s not much fol­low-up,” she said. “When the pub­lic sees a uni­formed se­cur­ity guard sit­ting at a desk, there’s an aura of power” ex­cept that the guard’s cap­ab­il­it­ies and role are not clear. “It sends the wrong mes­sage to the pub­lic.”

Though loc­al com­mand­ers have the op­tion of re­quir­ing ran­dom screen­ing of people en­ter­ing a fa­cil­ity, “the draw­back to screen­ing is a neg­at­ive im­pact on mis­sion,” said Steph­en Lewis, deputy dir­ect­or for per­son­nel, in­dus­tri­al and phys­ic­al se­cur­ity policy at the Of­fice of the Un­der­sec­ret­ary of De­fense for In­tel­li­gence. “With 10,000 people com­ing in the same win­dow, there’s a dis­in­cent­ive to get­ting the work done.”

Once back­ground checks are per­formed, “you have to trust the sys­tem,” said Caitlin Durkovich, Home­land Se­cur­ity’s as­sist­ant sec­ret­ary for in­fra­struc­ture pro­tec­tion. “There are op­por­tun­ity costs and re­source im­plic­a­tions” to check­ing every­one.

Some agen­cies, such as the Trans­port­a­tion De­part­ment, already screen all em­ploy­ees, said L. Eric Pat­ter­son, dir­ect­or of the Fed­er­al Pro­tect­ive Ser­vice. “But after a back­ground check, people are trust­worthy, so I would think this through care­fully.”

In dis­cuss­ing solu­tions, wit­nesses said all agen­cies are study­ing re­sponses to act­ive shoot­ers. They poin­ted to the lim­its on train­ing of guards, who, dur­ing a crisis, fo­cus on shield­ing and evac­u­at­ing em­ploy­ees but de­pend on loc­al law en­force­ment un­der vary­ing state laws to pur­sue an at­tack­er. They are per­mit­ted to con­front a live shoot­er on sight but can­not leave their posts in pur­suit, which re­quires find­ing “a happy me­di­um” between re­spond­ing and keep­ing se­cur­ity of­ficers safe, Pat­ter­son said. “There are thou­sands of build­ings, and we don’t have re­sources to put law en­force­ment in every build­ing.”

Durkovich said gov­ern­mentwide pro­tec­tion is a “risk-based pro­cess.” Not all build­ings are the same, she said, not­ing that strategies dif­fer for urb­an versus rur­al build­ings and, for ex­ample, for build­ings that have child care cen­ters or his­tor­ic des­ig­na­tions.

She ac­know­ledged un­der ques­tion­ing that com­pli­ance with re­com­mend­a­tions of the in­ter­gov­ern­ment­al pan­el set up after the 1993 bomb­ing of the fed­er­al build­ing in Ok­lahoma City has been left to the agen­cies them­selves.

Pat­ter­son said his agency has met six of 13 Gov­ern­ment Ac­count­ab­il­ity Of­fice re­com­mend­a­tions for im­prove­ments in train­ing and com­mu­nic­a­tion with staff. GAO ana­lyst Mark Gold­stein, however, test­i­fied that FPS “con­tin­ues to lack ef­fect­ive man­age­ment con­trols to en­sure its guards have met its train­ing and cer­ti­fic­a­tion re­quire­ments.”

Lewis said since the Navy Yard at­tack, the Pentagon has con­duc­ted “in­tern­al re­views of gaps and de­fi­cien­cies and shared oth­er agency best prac­tices.” He ex­pressed prom­ise in a new “en­ter­prise-wide” tool called the Iden­tity Man­age­ment En­ter­prise Ser­vices Ar­chi­tec­ture that provides real-time vet­ting of in­di­vidu­als re­quir­ing un­es­cor­ted ac­cess against mul­tiple data­bases.

Re­prin­ted with per­mis­sion from Gov­ern­ment Ex­ec­ut­ive. The ori­gin­al story can be found here.

This art­icle was pub­lished in Glob­al Se­cur­ity News­wire, which is pro­duced in­de­pend­ently by Na­tion­al Journ­al Group un­der con­tract with the Nuc­le­ar Threat Ini­ti­at­ive. NTI is a non­profit, non­par­tis­an group work­ing to re­duce glob­al threats from nuc­le­ar, bio­lo­gic­al, and chem­ic­al weapons.

What We're Following See More »
STAFF PICKS
What the Current Crop of Candidates Could Learn from JFK
1 days ago
WHY WE CARE

Much has been made of David Brooks’s recent New York Times column, in which confesses to missing already the civility and humanity of Barack Obama, compared to who might take his place. In NewYorker.com, Jeffrey Frank reminds us how critical such attributes are to foreign policy. “It’s hard to imagine Kennedy so casually referring to the leader of Russia as a gangster or a thug. For that matter, it’s hard to imagine any president comparing the Russian leader to Hitler [as] Hillary Clinton did at a private fund-raiser. … Kennedy, who always worried that miscalculation could lead to war, paid close attention to the language of diplomacy.”

Source:
STAFF PICKS
Maher Weighs in on Bernie, Trump and Palin
1 days ago
WHY WE CARE

“We haven’t seen a true leftist since FDR, so many millions are coming out of the woodwork to vote for Bernie Sanders; he is the Occupy movement now come to life in the political arena.” So says Bill Maher in his Hollywood Reporter cover story (more a stream-of-consciousness riff than an essay, actually). Conservative states may never vote for a socialist in the general election, but “this stuff has never been on the table, and these voters have never been activated.” Maher saves most of his bile for Donald Trump and Sarah Palin, writing that by nominating Palin as vice president “John McCain is the one who opened the Book of the Dead and let the monsters out.” And Trump is picking up where Palin left off.

Source:
×