MISSION DATA

Department of State Police Report on

Fixed Wing and the Extradition Program

September 18, 2013

The King Air 350 transports over 100 prisoners per year not only for the Maryland State Police (MSP),

and other county/municipal local law enforcement agencies (police and sheriff offices), such as:Anne

Arundel, Baltimore City/County, Carroll, Frederick (city/county), Harford, Howard, Montgomery,

Wicomico, Charles, Queen Anne, and Talbot Counties, to name a few, in addition to the Department of

Public Safety and Correctional Services, Parole & Probation and Department of Corrections and Natural

Resources Police have benefited from the safe and reliability of the Aviation Command aircraft. The MSP

Extradition Unit along with a number of allied agencies and their respective State's Attorney Office have

stated that they absolutely need to utilize the MSP aircraft, which provides safe transport

Maryland'smost violent felons, which helps keep their office in operation, as their budgets are limited.

The cost for allied agencies to do their own extraditions would rise dramatically, resulting in a

substantial increase in their budgets.

In the 6 month period (February - August, 2013) 62 prisoners (thirty-seven actual flights) have been

transported. Eighty percent of the Command's extraditions are in support of MSP operations.

ALTERNATIVES

Commercial Airlines:

MSP frequently transports known/identified violent fugitives who simply pose too great a risk to public

safety, to be taken commercially, per Transportation Safety Administration (TSA) regulations. Prisoners

may use offensive language, threaten the flight crew, and often need to be physically restrained. There

have been instances when inmates have urinated/defecated during transport. Thus, utilizing the MSP

owned King Air accompanied by sworn police officers for each prisoner ensures oversight and control,

which minimizes the general public from having to be exposed to identified violent felons and reduces

the chances of incident, and unfavorable light on Maryland State government.

Fugitives have become problematic at airports and on commercial flights, which result in the sworn

police officer being asked to immediately remove the prisoner from the flight. TSA regulations prohibit

high risk prisoners on commercial aircraft, only allowing low or medium risk fugitives. It must be noted,

some airlines no longer allow fugitives to be transported, with restraint devices regardless of their

threat level (Southwest Airlines). Recently, two allied agencies experienced problems while transporting

prisoners commercially and were denied seats for their prisoners. In both instances the agencies only

recourse was to rent vehicles and drive, in excess of 900 miles back to Maryland with their inmate.

1

Routinely, officers are delayed at prisons, for unknown reasons, while waiting for the release of their

prisoners. These delays have caused flights to be missed. If a flight is missed, TSA regulations prohibit

transport if not completed within same day; resulting in tickets not refunded and new tickets needing to

be purchased. Having the flexibility to operate regardless of airline schedules and to travel to airports in

close proximity to detaining facilities drastically reduces both cost and associated staff hours needed to

accomplish the mission. While occasionally a prisoner can be transported to an airport that is serviced

by the commercial airlines, the majority of prisons are located away from these facilities but still close to

smaller airports that can be utilized by general aviation aircraft. The Command's King Air often

transports multiple prisoners, thus reducing the cost per extradition.

Ground Transportation:

Prisoner transportation companies such as Prisoner Transport Service and Court Services offer ground

transportation but cannot assure the prisoner will be delivered by a requested date, which is often

needed to satisfy mandated court dates. One ofthe nation's largest transportation companies,

TransCor, stopped transportation for prisoners in 2008 because of liability and cost. '

The downside to ground transportation is first and foremost the risk to public safety and that of the staff

conducting the escort. A great deal of research is involved when soliciting a reliable ground transport

company. Their security certificate, experience, track record/history, training of staff, vehicles,

equipment, staff-inmate ratio for long-distance transporting, and other factors need to be considered.

Ground transportation also limits the distance in which the state of Maryland will transport the inmates.

Consequently, traveling beyond some areas of the east coast can be taxing on staff and prisoners.

Transporters must take into account the need for layovers wherein coordination with a local jailor

prison is warranted. Medical issues, food accommodations and lodging for prisoners and staff are an

issue and additional cost. The number of staff required to provide adequate security and alternate

drivers is also increased. Health issues are not easily resolved or may be exacerbated by long distance

ground transport.

The terrain and territory traveled is not always conducive for transporting inmates. Finding acceptable

means for accommodating bathroom breaks becomes difficult on a long stretch of uninhabited road.

This increases the risk of escape or inmate manipulation. Crossing state lines involves different law

enforcement regulations impacted by the transport.

Air Charter:

Regarding chartered air service, cost for the aircraft per hour would be higher than what it costs the

MSP to perform the extradition.

OTHER MISSIONS

1) Law enforcement missions that include search and rescue, speed enforcement, and Homeland

Security.

2

2) Natural Resource Police missions include boating law enforcement, jack lighting, turkey baiting,

and crab/oyster poaching.

3) Personnel transportation missions to include the Governor and his associates, maintenance

personnel, criminal investigators and the State's Attorney office.

WHEN THE AIRCRAFTWAS DOWN FOR MAINTENANCE

During the period that the King Air was out of service for required maintenance, the Department of

Public Safety and Correctional Services (DPSCS) began to curtail their request for out-of-state (Interstate

Corrections Compact) inmate transfers. They paid additional costs (commercial flights) for those cases

that had been approved or for emergency transports. They coordinated with other states to transport

our inmates after transporting theirs to Maryland, when possible. They also coordinated efforts with the

Department's Security Operations Unit (SOU) for ground transports, when possible. They were simply

unable to respond to certain transportation needs for court, protection, violence reduction, and

medical/mental health reasons.

Extraditions that occurred were conducted primarily via commercial flight Dr ground transport. One

problem associated with commercial flight is that some inmates are not good candidates for commercial

flights and/or the airlines will not allow them to fly under our conditions. Many of these transports

were deferred and DPSCS lost credibility with other states housing our inmates due to the inability to

remove or move them as requested. This situation was also true for scheduled court hearings that

were missed for this same reason.

There was one occasion where DPSCS used a ground transport company to return a violent Maryland

inmate from Washington State. Due to the inmate's propensity for violence and King Air being out of

commission, they paid a substantial cost to return him to Maryland. Cost may be obtained from Patricia

Moore of DPSCS.

Violence and protection issues are among the reasons transportation of inmates is needed. DPSCS

administrative segregation units and protective custody units are overcrowded. Holding these inmates

in usable beds has impacted our use of beds and bottle necked our process.

Similar risk factors are involved for commercial flights. However, many airlines will simply not allow

high-risk inmates in restraints to be transported with the general public.

3

BUDGET

Mission and flight hour cost analysis:

Each flight hour cost approximately $1,391.43 (Fuel + Maintenance + Hull Insurance + Pilot Cost)

1) Fuel Cost: $648 per flight hour (120 gallons per flight hour @ $5.40 per gallon)

2) Maintenance Cost: $242 per flight hour (per Conklin and Decker)

3) Hull Insurance Cost: $52.39 per flight hour or $16,325 per year

4) Pilot Cost (2 pilots): $449.04 per flight hour (Salary x 2 divided by average hours flown per

year)

Average Cost per Extradition in 2013 is $2,922 (Avg. 2.1 flight hours per Extradition x $1313.43)

Cost percentage assumptions as requested:

Total cost for Extraditions for the 6 month period from February to August, 2013 = $ 182,416.47

(131.1 flight hours x $1391.43 = $ 182,416.47)

MSP percentage (82%) = $ 149,581.50

Allied Agencies percentage (18%) = $32,834.96

The Maryland State Police Extradition Unit does not have a designated budget. However, in Fiscal Year

2012 extradition expenses were as follows:

1) Commercial Airfare: $64,845.80

2) Hotels: $10,205.09

3) Car Rentals: $4,180.87

4) Per Diem: $6674.50

5) Fuel for Rental Vehicles: $1,040.96

4

Extradition Report (Agency !Year/Flight Hours)

AGENCY 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 MDSP 40 46 43 55 72 86 86 111 105 AACo 1 2 3 3 1

ALLGCo 2 4 Balto Co 11 11 6 13 9 11 11 9 7 B alto City 2 1 2 1 Calvert Co 1 1 Carroll Co 5 6 2 8 1 1 6 Cecil Co 1

Charles Co 1 2 Fire Mrshl 2 Fredrck Co 4 2 1 4 4 1 1 Fruitland 1 2 5 1

Hagerstown 1 Harford co 1 2 3 6 5 5 8 5 Howard Co 10 18 24 9 3 3

Kent Co 1 Mont. Co 1 2 1 1

P. Anne Co. 1 Salisbury 1 2 1 1 4

St. Mary Co 1 1 Talbot Co 1 6 2 1

Westminster 1 Wicomico C 4 1

Total 74 87 78 99 100 125 114 136 139 Extraditions

FIt Hours 282 322 284 405 308 380 356 415 377 Hours per 3.8 3.7 3.6 4.0 3.1 3.0 3.1 3.0 2.7 ~risoner

5

Extradition Report (AgencyNear/Flight Hours)

AGENCY 2011* 2012* 2013** 2014 2015 2016 MDSP 16 * 51 AACo '"

ALLGCo '" Balto Co 2 '" 3 B alto City '" Calvert Co '" Carroll Co 1 '" 3 Cecil Co '"

Charles Co '" Fire Mrshl '" Fredrck Co '"

NRP '" 1 Hagerstown '" Harford co 2 '" Howard Co '"

Kent Co '" Mont. Co '" 2 Q.Anne '" 1 Salisbury 1 '"

st. Mary Co 1 '" Talbot Co '"

Westminster '" Wicomico C '" 1

Total 23* '" 62 Extraditions

Fit Hours 62.8* '" 131.1** Hours per 2.7 '" 2.1 prisoner

* Aircraft down for maintenance from March 10, 2011 through February 2013 "'''' Indicates the 6 month period from February - August, 2013

2017 2018 2019

6

Extradition Unit Statistics:

2012 Managed Extraditions

Requestor:

• Department of Public Safety and Correctional Services (DPSCS): 20S

• Maryland State Police (Barracks & Criminal Investigations Divisions: 18

• County Government (State's Attorney Office, Sheriff Office and/or Police): 0

• City Government: 0

Total: 223

Note: During 2012 a total of fifty-one (51) extraditions completed via commercial airline.

2011 Managed Extraditions

Requestor:

• Department of Public Safety and Correctional Services: 208

• Maryland State Police (Barracks & Criminal Investigations Division): 22

• County Government (Sta~e's Attorney Office, Sheriff Office and/or Police Department): 6

• City Government (Police Department): 1

• State of Maryland Department of Mental Health and Hygiene: 1

• Assist Virginia Department of Corrections (cooperative spirit between MSP Extradition and VA.

Department of Corrections, transport to MD/VA State line, prisoner exchange): 6

Total: 244

Note: During 2011 a total of seventy-four (74) extraditions completed via commerciatjMSP Aviation.

MSP Aviation transported: 23

Commercial Airlines: 51

The Extradition Unit coordinates many of the extraditions for local and state law enforcement. Before

using a commercial airline, which may be less expensive in some cases, consideration is given to the

threat level of the prisoner (s), safety of the public using the commercial airline, cost, and the number of

prisoners being transported.

7

The Aviation Command is sensitive to the cost associated with all of its missions. The Command is

always looking for ways to reduce costs and have made strides in that direction with regard to prisoner

extraditions. Since 2006, our staff has coordinated flights wherein multiple prisoners are handled on a

single flight. This action, as you can see by the chart, has reduced the flight hours per prisoner by almost

48%. The coordinated effort of our pilots and the Extradition Unit has resulted in significant cost savings.

It has also resulted in more prisoners being transported safely and away from the general public.

8