# Exercise maritime-facility security duties through drills and full exercises > Use 33 CFR 105.220 -- Maritime Security: Facilities to review this narrow operational decision without extending the source beyond its stated scope. - Canonical URL: https://update.dsesecurity.com/updates/exercise-maritime-facility-security-duties-through-drills-and-full-exercises/ - Publisher: Detection Systems & Engineering (DSE Security) - Author: DSE Security Editorial Team - Published: 2026-08-27T12:11:18+00:00 - Modified: 2026-08-27T13:09:37+00:00 - Last reviewed by DSE: 2026-08-26 - Resource type: Explainer - DSE priority: Advisory - Topics: Business Continuity, Cybersecurity - Reading time: 3 minutes ## What you need to know Use 33 CFR 105.220 -- Maritime Security: Facilities to review this narrow operational decision without extending the source beyond its stated scope. ## Potentially affected Teams, systems, services, or facilities within the stated scope of 33 CFR 105.220 -- Maritime Security: Facilities ## DSE recommendation Compare the observed state with the cited official source, document applicability and exceptions, and test any approved change with rollback safeguards. ## Article Frame this document as a source-led configuration and assurance check: Exercise maritime-facility security duties through drills and full exercises. Only the official source and traced locations below supply facts. Confirm applicability before acting. ## Source fact: The official [33 CFR 105.220 — Maritime Security: Facilities](https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-33/section-105.220) from U.S. Coast Guard via eCFR supports the following bounded statements: - Under 33 CFR 105, the rule requires that drills and exercises test the proficiency of facility personnel in assigned security duties at all MARSEC Levels and the effective implementation of the Facility Security Plan (FSP). The research record locates this support at 33 CFR 105.220(a)(1) (eCFR anchor p-105.220(a)(1)). - Under 33 CFR 105, the rule requires that exercises are a full test of the security program and include substantial and active participation of FSOs, and may include government authorities and vessels visiting the facility. The research record locates this support at 33 CFR 105.220(c)(5) (eCFR anchor p-105.220(c)(5)). Only the traced statements above are asserted as source facts. Apply the review to essential functions, upstream providers, recovery sequences, alternate work paths, and tested recovery objectives after confirming that the source and deployed context match. ## What the source does not establish Applies only to facilities within 33 CFR part 105 and the cited section. Confirm Coast Guard jurisdiction, the approved Facility Security Plan, the current MARSEC level, and any approved alternatives; this is not legal advice or a universal facility-design standard. No current deployment state or change approval follows from the source alone. Validate identity, DNS, communications, facilities, suppliers, and the people authorized to invoke recovery, and treat examples or options as conditional inputs rather than defaults. ## Applicability questions - For source statement 1 at 33 CFR 105.220(a)(1) (eCFR anchor p-105.220(a)(1)), which observable configuration, record, or test can confirm applicability here? - For source statement 2 at 33 CFR 105.220(c)(5) (eCFR anchor p-105.220(c)(5)), which observable configuration, record, or test can confirm applicability here? - Which owner can attest to the recorded state of essential functions, upstream providers, recovery sequences, alternate work paths, and tested recovery objectives, including exceptions? - What baseline for identity, DNS, communications, facilities, suppliers, and the people authorized to invoke recovery must accompany the source-specific observation? - Which success, stop, and escalation criteria are written before testing begins? ## DSE recommendation: DSE recommends using the cited source as the evidence anchor for this decision. Begin by recording scope and current state before deciding whether a change is warranted. Record the source location, examined part of essential functions, upstream providers, recovery sequences, alternate work paths, and tested recovery objectives, observed and expected states, owner, and reason for deviation. An implementation decision needs an owner, approved window, prechecks, observable outcome, stop authority, and rollback path. Validate identity, DNS, communications, facilities, suppliers, and the people authorized to invoke recovery before and after the test, and store only sanitized operational evidence. ## Verification and evidence Tie each conclusion back to 33 CFR 105.220(a)(1) (eCFR anchor p-105.220(a)(1)); 33 CFR 105.220(c)(5) (eCFR anchor p-105.220(c)(5)) and to observable material such as business-impact records, dependency maps, exercise results, recovery timings, and open corrective actions. Preserve provenance and stable identifiers without copying secrets into the evidence set. Preserve both successful and failed observations, along with approval and rollback evidence. Avoid uncontrolled production experiments. Assign an expiry or event-driven recheck so the conclusion is not treated as permanent. ## Official references - [33 CFR 105.220 — Maritime Security: Facilities](https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-33/section-105.220) — U.S. Coast Guard via eCFR ## Primary reference - Name: 33 CFR 105.220 -- Maritime Security: Facilities - Authority: www.ecfr.gov - URL: https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-33/section-105.220 - Source publication date: Not stated by the source ## Citation and use Preferred citation: “Exercise maritime-facility security duties through drills and full exercises,” DSE Security, https://update.dsesecurity.com/updates/exercise-maritime-facility-security-duties-through-drills-and-full-exercises/ Publishing principles: https://update.dsesecurity.com/updates/dse-updates-editorial-methodology/ Usage and citation policy: https://update.dsesecurity.com/usage/ Copyright © 2026 Detection Systems & Engineering. All rights reserved.