Copyright 2001
The Detroit News.
Use of this site indicates your agreement to the Terms of Service (updated 08/09/2001).
|
Reports detail lapses at airports
Loopholes allow access to secure areas of terminals
By Jeff Plungis / Detroit News Washington Bureau
WASHINGTON -- In a series of seven reports dating back to March 2000, government watchdogs outlined for congressional and administration overseers serious flaws in security procedures at American airports.
Federal investigators have repeatedly shown that because of the loopholes, individuals without proper clearance can enter areas of airports that are supposed to be secure and board aircraft. They have also shown that airport screeners often fail to find potential weapons.
Congress last year sought to plug some of the security leaks with legislation, but the Federal Aviation Administration is still writing the new rules. Only a requirement that airports conduct criminal background checks on employees has been put into effect.
Authorities haven't disclosed what security leaks the terrorists may have exploited to hijack four airliners last week before crashing three of them into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon.
Secretary of Transportation Norman Y. Mineta announced Sunday the creation of two task forces of nongovernment experts to report by Oct. 1 on improving security aboard airliners and at airports.
"These are complex issues, but we have a strong base on which to build. We can and will build on existing analysis as the Department of Transportation prepares to act on specific recommendations," Mineta said. "I'm confident that each of these distinguished (task force) members will help us do just that."
Four congressional committees this week are to launch new inquiries into airport safety.
Before the terrorists' attack, the Department of Transportation's inspector general was preparing this month to audit the training and performance of airport checkpoint screeners and their use of new equipment.
Spokesman David Barnes said those plans would now change, depending on direction from Congress.
In June 2000, the General Accounting Office wrote a prescient assessment of U.S. airport security:
"The threat of attacks on aircraft by terrorists or others remains a persistent and growing concern for the United States. According to the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the trend toward terrorism against U.S. targets is toward large-scale incidents designed for maximum destruction, terror and media impact."
One obstacle to installing tougher security measures, acknowledge some in Congress who have studied the matter, has been the issue of acceptability to American airlines, businesses and travelers.
"The problem was that we didn't want to be inconvenienced," said Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., who guided the Airport Security Improvement Act through the Senate last year.
"We knew, and we had report after report that you could breach security at an airport. Now, we will be inconvenienced and for a long time, probably significantly inconvenienced."
The specific flaws that federal investigators have been pointing out to Congress include:
* Airlines' problems in finding, training and keeping the screeners who operate metal detectors at airports. Inexperienced, inadequately trained screeners are less likely to pick up on signs of danger.
* Failure by airports and the FAA to ensure proper identification for entry to high-security areas.
* Inadequate controls over airport ID badges after airport employees leave or change responsibilities.
In the legislation passed last year, Congress mandated criminal background checks for airport employees, which are now being made. Congress further asked the FAA to fine airport workers who fail to spot undercover agents penetrating secure areas with false identification. The FAA says that in such cases it now levies fines of as much as $1,000.
The law further required the FAA to come up with guidelines for better training of security workers to go into effect by May 31. The agency is still writing the regulations. A spokesman says it isn't uncommon to miss such a deadline because of the complexity of government rule-making.
The FAA spokeswoman, Rebecca Trexler, said the regulations would be completed within a few weeks. But even after the rules go into effect, airlines and their security firms are likely to be given several months to comply. Trexler could not give a specific timetable.
And the legislation instructed the FAA to evaluate the security at every air traffic-control tower. But that program doesn't have to be completed until 2004.
The General Accounting Office reported on problems with airport screeners to a House subcommittee March 16, 2000. The following April 6, the GAO told a Senate panel about gaps in computer security and the slow progress of the FAA to address security issues. On May 25 of the same year, the GAO reported it was able to breach security at two airports and numerous federal sites using fake IDs.
The agency summed up its findings in a June 2000 report: "Aviation Security: Long-Standing Problems Impair Airport Screeners' Performance."
The GAO found that some of the busiest airports, like Hartsfield Atlanta International Airport, had an annual turnover rate among screening personnel approaching 400 percent.
That means that to keep every screening position filled the airport had to hire four people a year. The average turnover rate nationally was 126 percent. Detroit Metro's turnover rate was better than average but still high, at 79 percent.
The GAO found that airport screeners in other countries received better pay, benefits and training.
In this country, the airlines are responsible for the screening, which they usually contract out to private concerns, often to the lowest bidder. Detroit Metro officials said their screeners are paid between $7 and $10 an hour.
The GAO remains critical of the time it has taken the FAA to act, last year saying the agency was then two years behind. "This is very important," said Gerald Dillingham, the GAO's associate director for transportation issues. "They're the last line of defense."
Trexler, the FAA spokeswoman, said the agency was in the process of replacing each of the 1,400 metal-detecting X-ray machines at U.S. airports with more sensitive models. So far 600 have been replaced. The new machines project computer-generated images of guns, knives and bombs to keep screeners alert. The screeners have to push a button to determine whether the image is false or real.
The Transportation Department's Insp. Gen. Kenneth Mead, has also released a string of troubling reports. He heads an in-house office set up to scrutinize the department's performance. The office reported Nov. 19, 1999, that its undercover agents had easily penetrated secure areas of eight major airports and had improperly boarded planes.
In 1998 and 1999, undercover agents of the Inspector General's Office tried to gain access to secure areas 173 times at the eight airports. They succeeded and were able to board aircraft 117 times, or on 68 percent of the attempts.
In April 2000, the office reported on the need to strengthen background checks for airport workers, on gaps in security in highly restricted areas and on the failure to deploy equipment that detects explosives. The explosives-detecting gear was a 1997 recommendation of a commission led by then-Vice-President Al Gore that was set up after TWA flight 800 crashed off Long Island. Critics complain that the machines are complicated and cumbersome.
Last December, the inspector general reported that there were inadequate controls over the issuance of airport IDs and that airport operators and airlines frequently failed to follow requirements for background checks of potential employees.
The FAA's Trexler said the agency tightened security after the 1999 report. Through aggressive testing, the FAA now believes access is better controlled, she said.
But last year, GAO agents were still able to bypass metal detectors in Orlando and at Reagan National Airport in Washington, D.C., by posing as law-enforcement officials with counterfeit IDs.
In the wake of last week's attack, the Department of Transportation is already implementing new restrictions on personal movements at airports.
Passengers can expect many more inconveniences, starting immediately. Curbside baggage check-ins are already a thing of the past. Passengers will see more police, and there will be more frequent searches with hand-held "wand" metal detectors.
Detroit Metro Airport officials said they will have two or three airport marshals at every security checkpoint. Before reopening the airport, they did a complete security sweep for bombs. They also held extensive security briefings with airport screeners.
Detroit airport officials removed all knives, nail files and razor blades from airport stores and restaurants. Northwest Airlines, the airport's largest carrier, will discontinue its popular e-ticket check-in.
Security screeners up to now have been trained to search principally for guns. The kinds of knives and box cutters apparently used by the 18 terrorists who hijacked four planes last week wouldn't send up red flags.
The steps so far to tighten security may help to restore consumer confidence in the system, but it may be impossible to construct a truly fail-safe system.
Rep. Vernon Ehlers, R-Grand Rapids, who sits on the House Transportation panel with jurisdiction over aviation, recalled a private briefing by the FAA two years ago on security measures.
"After listening to what they were doing and keeping up with every detail, I said, 'I have figured out four different ways to sneak a bomb on an airplane,'" Ehlers said.
In addition, it may be that the problem of hijackings must be solved by law enforcement, not the FAA, some experts suggest.
"You need to do all of these things to maintain a credible deterrent," said Darryl Jenkins of George Washington University's aviation institute. "What if we were able to make transportation 100 percent secure. Will that really be the end of terrorism?"
Detroit News Staff Writer Gebe Martinez contributed to this story. You can reach Jeff Plungis at (202) 662-7378 or jplungis@detnews.com.
|
Comment on this story