New Agency Meets Deadlines, But How Real Is Security?
2002-01-30 18:34 (New York)
New Domestic Bag Matching Requirement Takes Effect Without Significant
Delays
The new Transportation Security Administration (TSA) began
requiring U.S. air carriers to implement domestic bag matching on Jan.
18. It went smoothly, with only a few delays at the nation's airports.
But the program is not without its critics, who cite a major loophole
in the policy - bag matching only has to be done for passengers on
originating flights, not connecting flights.
Positive passenger bag matching (PPBM) is one of four methods
air carriers use to screen checked luggage. Among the other methods,
the most thorough is scanning bags with an explosives detection system
(EDS) machine, but only 165 machines are operational at 52 airports,
according to Department of Transportation Inspector General (DOT/OIG)
Kenneth M. Mead. Another method is to use dogs to sniff for explosives
in bags, but only about 175 dogs are in use at U.S. airports. Air
carriers also have utilized employees to hand search luggage.
The failure to perform bag matching for connecting flights
presents a security risk, many experts complain. This results in about
25 percent of checked luggage not being reconciled with its owner.
The PPBM system would not have detected the bomb in an
unaccompanied bag that brought down Pan Am 103 on Dec. 21, 1988, above
Lockerbie, Scotland, killing 270 people. In addition, many industry
experts believe that bag matching will not deter a suicide bomber.
The aviation industry remains a terrorist target, and limiting
bag match to originating passengers leaves a gap in the nation's
security defenses. Consider this case: a passenger who originates at
Denver, with a stopover at Chicago O'Hare International Airport (ORD),
and a continuing flight into Washington, DC's Reagan National Airport
(DCA). PPBM has been applied to all inbound and outbound flights since
DCA's reopening Oct. 4, 2001, but it is clear from testimony at a House
Aviation Subcommittee hearing last week that bags and continuing
passengers are not reconciled for flights to DCA, even though the
airport's delayed resumption of operations was conditional on extra
security procedures. In fact, the problem applies nationwide.
Capt. Steve Luckey, a security expert with the Air Line Pilots
Association (ALPA), says there is a difference between bag-match and
bag-resolution. Bag-match relates the passenger to the checked bag.
Bag-resolution starts with the bag and connects it to the passenger. By
this means, the "rogue" or unaccompanied bag would be prevented. With
bag-match for originating flights only, the bag-resolution aspect for
continuing flights will not be done. "Bag-match without resolution is
not adequate," Luckey declared.
The new security agency was praised by members of the
congressional aviation subcommittee for meeting every deadline imposed
on it so far by the Aviation and Transportation Security Act. But
government officials and industry experts last week pointed to glaring
holes that remain in aviation security.
It will take the TSA most of this year to implement the major
provisions of the security act signed into law Nov. 19, 2001, by
President Bush. The agency has performed well in creating a culture of
compliance in just two months, but security experts question the
effectiveness of some of its measures.
The bag match debate is just one of several controversial topics
industry experts have wrestled with over the last two months.
It quickly became apparent after the signing of the security act
that the Dec. 31, 2002, deadline for installing EDS machines at the
nation's airports might not be met (see ASR, Dec. 18, 2001). The FAA
said that nearly 1,800 additional machines would be needed at the 429
commercial airports. But the two companies certified by the FAA to make
the machines - InVision Technologies [INVN] of Newark, Calif. and New
York-based L-3 Communications [LLL] - said they would not be able to
produce enough machines with their existing facilities. In addition,
each machine costs close to $1 million.
Under Secretary of Transportation for Security John Magaw last
week told the subcommittee that the government is considering offering
EDS licensing rights to other companies in an effort to meet the tight
deadline. To date, the DOT has not ordered any machines from either
manufacturer since September. Meanwhile, European Civil Aviation
Conference members have an identical year-end deadline for European
airports to have 100 percent EDS screening of luggage. European
governments have ordered about a dozen machines since September in
anticipation of their year-end deadline (see ASR, Jan. 16).
Airports also are experiencing problems with the logistics of
installing and using EDS machines. Many airports have placed stand-
alone machines in front of reservation counters, adding to congestion.
Stand-alone machines require several employees to handle the luggage
going in and out, therefore adding to employee costs and check-in
delays. DOT/OIG's Mead said he has "serious reservations" about the
effectiveness of screening bags by placing machines in the airport
lobby, instead of integrating them into existing baggage handling
systems.
Airports will have to absorb some of the construction costs for
integrating the machines into the screening process, said David Plavin,
president of Airports Council International-North America (ACI-NA). But
airports have not been given guidance on design standards to
incorporate the machines into the existing security infrastructure or
on reimbursement for those infrastructure costs, he said. Each airport
is unique in design, which means there can't be a "cookie-cutter"
approach to installing machines, Plavin asserted.
In addition, security industry experts were dismayed with the
DOT's decision not to require at minimum a high school diploma for
individuals to apply to be a federal airport screener. One year's
security work experience - not strictly airport screening - is enough
for applicants to be considered for the position.
Meanwhile, the competence of current screeners continues to be
tested. Security personnel at the Phoenix Sky Harbor International
Airport (PHX) almost confiscated a Medal of Honor from retired Marine
Corps Gen. Joseph Foss, which he received during World War II for
shooting down 26 enemy planes in the Pacific theater. Foss told The
Washington Times that the screeners had no idea what the medal was,
even though his accomplishments were inscribed on the back of the
medal. Foss told the screeners during a 45-minute dispute that he would
not board his America West Airlines [AWA] flight to Washington, DC,
without the medal. He eventually kept his medal and boarded the flight.
PPBM Comes Under House Scrutiny
The House Aviation Subcommittee took a close look at the
effectiveness of PPBM. Prof. Arnold Barnett of the Massachusetts
Institute of Technology told the panel that during a large-scale PPBM
trial he conducted in 1997 for the FAA, he determined that only 14
percent of flights would be delayed by reconciling checked baggage. The
average delay was seven minutes per flight (see ASR, Nov. 20, 2001).
PPBM would cost about 50 cents per passenger and would require no
reduction in flight schedules.
Barnett told the subcommittee that JetBlue and Frontier Airlines
have recently instituted PPBM and have had delays in only 3 percent of
flights. Claims by airlines that PPBM would cause substantial flight
delays are "not only unsupported, but are strongly contradictive," he
said.
DOT/OIG's Mead testified that his investigators observed 78
flights at 12 airports involving 18 air carriers on Jan. 18.
Investigators found that air carriers predominately used PPBM to screen
passengers' checked baggage, with delays of only 6 percent of flights
observed, he said.
Barnett supported the idea that PPBM should be extended to
domestic connecting passengers so that no bag slips through the cracks.
PPBM should also be continued in the future along with EDS screening to
create layers of baggage screening security, he said. "It's not clear
that those whom we fear are going to give us the time" to conduct
further studies of PPBM, Barnett warned. "It's time to finish the job."
But the whole bag match effort may be only temporary. Speaking
two weeks ago at the 81st annual convention of the Transportation
Research Board (TRB), RAdm. Paul Busick, USCG (Ret.), the FAA's
security czar, said once enough EDS machines are deployed, bag matching
will likely drop by the wayside.
Magaw told the subcommittee that "in working with the airlines,
we have been able to reach the first step - originating flights.
[Screening connecting luggage] would have been too much." He did say
the agency would consider keeping PPBM once full EDS screening began.
Growing Security Workforce Strains Budgets
The major challenges facing TSA are the hiring and training of a
qualified workforce, which will put a strain on TSA's tight budget,
Mead said. In all, the TSA workforce could balloon to 40,000 employees,
including screeners, executives, federal security directors, law
enforcement officers, federal air marshals and support personnel. The
number of screeners depends upon how EDS machines are installed at
airports, Mead concluded. If left as stand-alone equipment, these
machines will need several employees to handle luggage. Fewer employees
are needed for machines integrated into baggage handling systems.
About $10 billion in funds will be necessary to purchase,
install and maintain equipment, along with hiring employees over the
next two years, Mead estimated. EDS equipment could cost between $1.9
billion and $2.5 billion, not including $2.3 billion for installation.
Operating costs for FY2002 could total between $2 billion and $2.2
billion, and for FY2003, between $3 billion and $3.5 billion.
The agency could be hard pressed for funding next year. Only
about $2.3 billion will be raised from the passenger security fee,
airline contributions and congressional appropriations. >> Barnett,
phone, 617/253-2670; Plavin, 202/293-8500; Mead, 202/366-1959 <<
TSA's First Steps For Improving Security
The most notable steps the Transportation Security
Administration (TSA) has taken on aviation security so far include:
* Issued screener qualifications and developed a training plan
for aviation security screeners;
* Issued proposed procedures for airport and parking lot
operators, and directed vendors to seek part of the $1.5 billion
authorized to cover direct security costs;
* Identified and reported to Congress on airspace security
measures to improve general aviation security;
* Issued guidance for training programs to prepare crew members
for potential threats on passenger aircraft;
* Issued the rule to begin collecting the $2.50 security fee
effective Feb. 1;
* Required air carriers to screen 100 percent of checked baggage
using explosives detection equipment or alternative means, including
positive passenger bag match.
Source: DOT Office of Inspector General
DOT Recruits Federal Security Directors
The Department of Transportation (DOT) has begun recruiting
individuals for the position of federal security directors (FSD) at
U.S. airports.
In the past, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has
placed federal security managers only at the nation's busiest 20
airports that were international gateways for most passengers. Those
airports are considered high risk. The newly created Transportation
Security Administration (TSA) will initially fill positions at the
nation's 81 busiest airports. Eventually, all 429 commercial U.S.
airports will be assigned a federal security director.
The FSD will be the agency's point-person for airport security.
Each director will be responsible for leading federal security
operations, hiring and training federal security employees and
directing all federal law enforcement activity throughout the airport
in coordination with local authorities.
Aspiring FSDs must show experience in law enforcement,
intelligence, security or field operations, with proven strategic
leadership. Candidates must pass a background investigation for a top-
secret clearance to deal with government intelligence information.
The many prerequisites and duties are likely to attract military
special operations personnel and individuals with similar backgrounds.
FSDs will train on tactical planning, execution and operating
management for coordinating security services required by the TSA.
Basic salary ranges from $104,800 to $150,000.
Under Secretary of Transportation for Security John Magaw told
Congress the first group of about 30 FSDs will be selected within the
next two weeks.
Source: Department of Transportation
TSA Funding Sources for FY 2002 ($ in millions)
FY 2002 : Security Fee
Low Projection: $1,038
High Projection: $1,038
FY 2002 : Airline Contribution
Low Projection: $0
High Projection: $300
FY 2002 : FY 2002 Appropriations for Civil Aviation Security
Low Projection: $150
High Projection: $150
FY 2002 : FY 2002 First Supplemental
Low Projection: $452
High Projection: $452
FY 2002 : FY 2002 Second Supplemental
Low Projection: $100
High Projection: $100
FY 2002 : Subtotal: Operations Funding
Low Projection: $1,740
High Projection: $2,041
FY 2002 : FY 2002 Appropriations for EDS
Low Projection: $97
High Projection: $97
FY 2002 : FY 2002 Supplemental EDS
Low Projection: $196
High Projection: $196
FY 2002 : Subtotal: EDS Funding
Low Projection: $293
High Projection: $293
FY 2002 : Total Funding
Low Projection: $2,033
High Projection: $2,334
Source: Department of Transportation Office of Inspector General
FOR MORE INFORMATION on this or any other story from Airport Security
Report, January 30, 2002, please call PBI Media, LLC's Client Service
Department at 800/777-5006. |
