Attachment I

 

 

Video Documentation and Surveillance (VDS) Camera Installation Criteria

 

Purpose:  This document provides guidance to the director of University Police and the Security Technologies Advisory Group (STAG) when considering locations and addressing requests for placement of video documentation and surveillance (VDS) cameras. 

 

Potential VDS camera locations generally fall into one of three groups:

 

A.   Type “A”

 

Locations Ideally Suited for Camera Placement. VDS cameras shall be optimally placed in these locations to detect, deter, and obtain evidence of criminal or otherwise prohibited behavior. Examples of such locations include:

 

1.    Primary, secondary, and service entrances to buildings

2.    Inside elevator cabs

3.    Exterior building overviews

4.    Point-of-sale and cashiering operations

5.    Vehicle and pedestrian entrances to parking garages

6.    Parking lot and parking garage overviews

 

B.   Type “B”

 

Locations Unsuitable for Camera Placement. VDS cameras shall not be placed in these locations without prior review by the STAG and written authorization from the vice president for Student Affairs and the vice chancellor and general counsel of The Texas State University System.  Examples of such locations include:

 

1.    Any installation for which the primary intended use is the monitoring of employee performance.

2.    Any installation that would violate an individual’s reasonable expectation of privacy, such as restrooms, showers, dressing areas, areas used for clinical assessment or treatment of mental or physical health, dorm rooms, private residences, individual offices and conference rooms (with capacity under 50 individuals), or which would provide recognizable or readable view of the contents of an individual’s computer screen, etc.

3.    Third party commercial banking facilities (e.g., ATM’s) or similar locations for which the responsibility clearly lies with the third party.

 

C.   Type “C”

 

Locations that require review and authorization by the STAG and by those responsible for the spaces that will be visible to VDS cameras. Examples of such locations include:

 

1.    Locations used primarily for instructional or research purposes (e.g., classrooms, laboratories, etc.)

2.    Critical infrastructure locations (e.g., data centers, network switch locations, Co-Gen, pump stations, etc.)

3.    Locations housing hazardous materials

4.    Warehouse, storage, and distribution facilities

5.    Areas with large amounts of personal property held by the university

6.    Large patron gathering locations (e.g., coliseum, stadium, malls, theaters)

7.    Areas with a history of client or patron disputes (e.g., Parking Services)

8.    Areas primarily occupied by minors (e.g., Child Development Center)

9.    Any location that might present a risk to university compliance with rules, standards, or requirements (e.g., NCAA, SACS, etc.) 

10. Any other area not clearly identified as a type “A” or type “B” location as described above.

 

Camera Request Evaluation Criteria: The following criteria shall be considered in responding to requests for VDS camera placement to assure that all such placements are consistent with VDS policy.

 

1.    What is the history of incidents at the location (at Texas State or other institutions)?

2.    What is the nature of the property at risk (value, replacement difficulty, portability, desirability, controlled substance, etc.)?

3.    What purpose would be served by the video documentation?

4.    How invasive would the requested cameras be to users of the area in view?

5.    Can/should the requested cameras be integrated with existing/planned security and emergency management technologies (e.g., building access control and alarm systems)?

6.    What liability issues arise, if any, from not installing the requested cameras?

7.    If the camera is intended to serve multiple purposes, how compatible are those purposes (e.g., security, process auditing, academic research, etc.)?

8.    Are there other and perhaps more appropriate methods than camera placement for achieving the desired objectives?

9.    Are there cost control or avoidance benefits that derive from the camera’s placement (e.g., delegated monitoring of cameras in multiple labs by a single individual)?