Strategic Site Protection

Strategic Site Protection

Protecting the people who protect the President, the keepers of America’s secrets, her strategic assets, and arsenals, are Isotec’s opportunity to serve our country. Without reservation, we pride ourselves on execution and deliveries that meet all contracted site specific designs, and operational requirements. Serving the needs of our agencies is an honor and privilege. Isotec applies what we’ve learn from serving our country to our municipal and commercial projects. Call us at 300.800.3344 for more information on how we can keep safe and protect your facility.

Photos were not permitted. This project featured an X-ray station with SAFETY Act approved Access Control Portals.

 AVT-Ft. Meade-Visitor ENT-v3.1-Front ISO

Isotec Security Protects Homeland Security Facility

Isotec Security deployed multiple technological innovations with its recent delivery of an automated security entrance system for a DHS agency. The site specific, bullet resistant, automated weapons, access and materials control system is the most technologically advanced system available for controlling public access to a government facility. “The challenge was direct. Create innovative solutions that would exceed our customer’s functionality and aesthetic expectations.”

Isotec Security’s expertise for invention and innovation made this system its most advanced automated security solution; demonstrating yet again Isotec Security’s ability to provide site specific and risk appropriate security for the strategic assets of the Departments of Defense, Energy and Homeland Security.

The multi entrance system is remotely monitored and controlled by ICON, Isotec Security’s proprietary IP communication and graphic user interface technology. ICON’s command and control capability enables the system to interface with metal detectors, intercoms, multi-level infrared object detection, video cameras, motion and presence sensors, card readers and Isotec Security’s proprietary Anti-tailgating (ATG) technology.

To meet specified risk and threat detection requisites, Isotec Security designed an infrared detection system that instantly identifies abandoned objects within control areas. Code named “Vigilant”, the application will insure that articles entering control areas and passage ways are screened.

Designed in collaboration with CAMsulting, the magnetic locks securing the Dual Directional Doors “D3” are designed to give way in the event of an emergency. This capability enhances the fail safe nature of the system without affecting its mission critical security functionality of the magnetic locks securing the doors.

Isotec Security also unveiled its 3G ambient lighting package. The system utilizes recessed LED technology, creating an even and brighter ambiance within desired control areas. The lighting system reduces installation time and energy costs vs. canned incandescent lighting.

The D3 magnetic lock system and 3G LED system will be commercially available in Isotec’s High Security Ballistic series in 2011.

Isotec Security is a comprehensive security solutions provider and manufacturer of automated “hard posture” security systems, and related security management technologies designed for deterrence, detection and protection against acts of terrorism. These bullet resistant systems have a proven history for seamlessly interfacing with existing security systems or components.

Isotec Security Automated Anti-Terrorism Technologies Deployed

WESTMINSTER, CO, Marketwire – November 8, 2010

Isotec Security is pleased to announce the completion of two site specific automated security installations in August. These installations were the result of successful collaborations, one of which with Sandia National Laboratories. Some of features of these automated security systems include Isotec Security’s proprietary Anti-tailgating technology, High Security door construct, and UL Level V bullet resistant glass.

Over the past twelve months Isotec Security has deployed and will provide a total of nine different automated security solutions for the Department of Energy, Department of Defense and Department of Homeland Security. These automated security systems were chosen for their ability to meet the security requisites of each facility, their capability to interface with legacy security systems and aesthetically assimilate into each facility’s existing architecture and design.

Additionally, Isotec Security was chosen to provide the design, fabrication and installation training for an overseas Department of Defense installation; the main reason of which was Isotec Security’s reputation and proven history for developing site specific and risk appropriate solutions for secure and strategic facilities.

Sandia National Laboratories also contracted Isotec Security for an installation on behalf of the Department of Defense. The project featured a High Security entrance including bullet resistant glass. The system was installed on the same day it was delivered. This rapid deployment demonstrated Isotec Security’s user friendly designs and modular configurations.

Isotec Security is a comprehensive security solutions provider and manufacturer of automated “hard posture” security systems and technologies designed to deter, detect and protect against acts of terrorism. These systems have a proven history of 100% compliance to site specific mission critical security, aesthetics, durability and seamlessly interfacing with existing security systems or components.

Isotec Security is headquartered in Westminster, Colorado and is a leader of innovative automated security solutions and systems.

Problems with security at federal buildings continue, GAO report finds.

Problems with security at federal buildings continue, GAO report finds.

Bank Guard !By Joe Davidson, Washington Post, Wednesday, April 14, 2010

It is painfully easy to fool the protective force that guards Uncle Sam’s real estate.

This one nugget stands out among many disturbing facts in a report the Government Accountability Office released Tuesday: Guards allowed prohibited items – such as guns, knives and bombs – into federal facilities two-thirds of the time in tests conducted by the Federal Protective Service.

The testers used fake weapons, but the guards didn’t know that. They also didn’t know what to do when they managed to stop a tester who was trying to sneak in some contraband. In one case, all the guards at an unnamed facility focused on an individual who was stopped with a fake gun, only to allow another FPS inspector to waltz through the security checkpoint unstopped, even though he was carrying two knives.

The problems with security at federal buildings have been a topic of GAO reports before. This latest document includes information similar to what the GAO previously reported, but that makes it no less troubling, and the issues bear repeating until the government gets building security right. The GAO prepared the current report for a House Committee on Homeland Security hearing Wednesday that will look at whether the FPS should be federalized.

“For most people, the contract guards are the face of the Federal Protective Service,” said committee Chairman Bennie Thompson (D-Miss.). “Unfortunately, that face has some disturbing features.”

Members of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee plan to introduce legislation this month to reform the service.

Almost all of the people who guard federal buildings controlled by the General Services Administration are contractors. There are 15,000 contract guards and about 700 federal law enforcement officers in the FPS. The guards can detain troublemakers, but only law enforcement officers can make arrests.

But the FPS is in charge of managing the guards, and the agency has not done a stellar job of that. According to the GAO:

  • Some contractors didn’t comply with the terms of their contracts, and the FPS took no action against them. The GAO said the agency did nothing to seven contract companies who employed guards with expired certification and training requirements.
  • The agency apparently can’t determine which guards have complied with requirements because, the report says, “FPS currently does not have a fully reliable system for monitoring and verifying whether its 15,000 guards have the certifications and training to stand post at federal facilities.”
  • The FPS doesn’t always evaluate guards properly. Not only did the seven contractors escape any sanction for not fulfilling the terms of their contracts, but the FPS also gave them ratings of satisfactory or better.
  • The FPS hasn’t provided some guards with the required training on X-ray or magnetometer machines that are used to detect weapons. In July 2009, the GAO reported that 1,500 guards had not received the 16 hours of required training. As of February, they still had not, according to the GAO, although the FPS says they will by December.

Just in time for the hearing, the Department of Homeland Security, the FPS’s parent agency, announced new security standards for all federal buildings and facilities. The DHS said the standards will “address site, structural, interior and system security, as well as security operations and administration.” The DHS also said a “Design-Basis Threat Report” will “inform these customizable standards with current threat-based intelligence.”

The GAO reports provide strong ammunition for those who want to have federal law enforcement officers replace the guards. But the Obama administration has no plans to do that.

In his prepared statement, FPS Director Gary Schenkel said, “While we believe we can effectively secure federal buildings with the current mix of highly trained federal staff and contract guards, we have not ruled out the possibility of expanding our federal workforce to enhance the ability of our men and women to fulfill the FPS mission.”

David Wright, president of the National Federal Protective Service Union, supports federalization, yet he acknowledged that would not be cheap – “doing the right thing rarely is,” his statement said.

But Wright said the risk is too high to rely on guards who are guided by companies whose top priority is to “increase profit to the shareholder.”