*EPF509 09/10/2004
U.S. Gaining Ground in Transportation Security
(Vulnerabilities remain to be tackled, officials, experts agree) (1320)

By Andrzej Zwaniecki
Washington File Staff Writer

(This article is the first in a five-part series on transportation security.)

Washington -- The U.S. government has achieved significant improvements in making the U.S. transportation system more resistant to terrorist attacks, but it needs to have a strategy to mitigate remaining vulnerabilities, congressional leaders and experts say.

Representatives of the air transportation and shipping industries agree that the level of security today in their respective sectors is better than it was on September 11, 2001.

The bipartisan National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States, known as the 9/11 Commission, noted security upgrades, including air baggage screened for explosives and sea cargo prescreened at selected foreign ports, introduced after the terrorists attacks in New York and Washington.

Since then, Congress has passed a number of bills, including the Aviation Transportation Security Act and Maritime Transportation Security Act, designed to prevent terrorists from attacking the U.S. transportation system or using the system to mount new attacks.

The administration also has taken a systematic approach, trying to extend the U.S. security zone beyond U.S. borders and build many layers of defenses between foreign departure points and U.S. shores so that if one breaks down, another can provide protection. Under the Container Security Initiative (CSI), the United States negotiated bilateral agreements with 18 countries to place U.S. Customs inspectors at foreign ports to prescreen cargo containers. In addition, it won the worldwide approval of a new maritime security regime when the 148 member countries of the International Maritime Organization adopted international port and ship security standards in 2002.

In addition, the administration has invested in new technologies to prepare for new threats as terrorists' tactics and methods evolve.

"Science and technology is key to winning this new kind of war," Secretary of Homeland Security Tom Ridge said in September.

The Transportation Security Administration (TSA) in the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has been working on technologies ranging from sophisticated explosives-sniffing passenger portals to "smart" tamper-resistant containers to blast-resistant cargo containers for passenger planes.

In summarizing these and other efforts, Ridge observed that thanks to them "our nation is safer, stronger, and better protected than ever before."

STRATEGIC PLAN NEEDED

When the 9/11 Commission looked at a larger picture of transportation security, it came to a conclusion that an integrated strategic plan was needed to look holistically at the entire transportation system with all its interconnections and interdependencies.

"In a free society we cannot protect everything everywhere, all the time," commission Chairman Thomas Kean said in an August 16 congressional testimony. "But they [American people] expect their government to make rational decisions about how to allocate limited resources."

During the same hearing, Asa Hutchinson, under secretary of homeland security, said that a strategic transportation security plan "fully integrated and coordinated with all of the sector plans" should be completed in 2004. He said TSA is developing a prioritized list of critical assets and vulnerabilities that will serve as the basis for allocating resources.

The commission also said that the U.S. government needs to rethink its priorities. Kean said that the bulk of TSA's attention and funding has been directed toward aviation security even though the risk of significant harm is as great or greater in maritime and land transportation.

In a March 31, 2003, report to Congress, TSA said that because the rail, subway and bus transportation systems were subject to no mandatory security requirements, little or no screening of passengers, baggage or crew has been done. A terrorist attack on any of these industries, which serve far more passengers than airlines, could severely damage the confidence of the U.S. public in commercial and public passenger systems, TSA said.

Following the terrorist attacks on commuter trains in Madrid in March, DHS decided to expand its use of bomb-sniffing dogs on mass transit and to test the feasibility of screening luggage and carry-on bags for explosives at rail stations and aboard trains.

As to maritime security, U.S. Coast Guard officials said during the August 25 House hearing that additional improvements in maritime security would require further development of strong partnerships among the federal government, states and the private sector.

"No single maritime stake holder ... can do the job alone," they said in the joint prepared testimony.

COST, PRIVACY TRADEOFFS

Administration officials said that those partnerships were also about sharing the costs of security.

Over the past three years, the administration has devoted nearly $15 billion to strengthen aviation security, according to its budget proposal for the fiscal year beginning October 1 (FY 2005). In this proposal, it requests nearly $5.3 billion for the Transportation Security Administration, which did not even exist in 2001.

However, critics are not satisfied with either the level or distribution of spending. Security expert Stephen Flynn said that the administration has provided so far only a fraction of what the Coast Guard estimates is needed to make U.S. ports more secure.

Senator Robert Byrd, a Democrat from West Virginia, admonished the administration during a March Senate appropriations hearing for proposing a 60 percent cut from the 2004 fiscal year spending levels in port security grants and said that the air marshals program has insufficient resources to place armed plainclothes guards on targeted domestic and international flights.
In response, Hutchinson, who testified during the same hearing, said that the administration believes in "a shared responsibility" among the federal government, the private sector and the port authorities.
"We do not believe it's exclusively a federal government responsibility to do all of the port security investment," he said.
Businesses, so far at least, have grudgingly borne their share of security costs.

Bill Clark, executive director of the American Institute for Shippers Associations, said that the attempts to quantify additional costs of security for the shipping industry have not produced "solid" numbers so far. But the industry feels the pressure, he said.

John Meenan, executive vice president of the Air Transportation Association, an airline industry trade group, said that the airline industry shouldered "extensive" costs of federal security mandates and related taxes and fees -- roughly $3.8 billion annually -- and expected to bear a "fair share" in the future. He said, however, that the industry, which, as a result of high fuel prices and intensified competition, was in poor financial condition, has felt the effects of security expenses.

In addition to higher costs, the evolution of the transportation system has forced tradeoffs between security on one side and convenience and privacy for passengers on another. Although air passengers grudgingly accept some level of security-related inconveniences at airports, as indicated by media reports, those passengers set a limit on privacy restrictions. An upgrade version of the Computer-Assisted Passenger Prescreening System, known as CAPPS II, has been shelved over passengers' and their congressional representatives' privacy concerns.

CAPPS II, which was intended to identify higher-risk passengers for additional security procedures before they board the plane, was criticized by Congress and civil liberties groups for inadequate privacy protection, particularly for using commercial data, and a lack of a sufficient redress procedure for misidentified passengers. Airlines were reluctant to give the DHS passenger data for testing because they were concerned about liability issues.

In August, TSA announced that it would replace CAPPS II with a new, more limited program, called Secure Flight. Under the new system, TSA would take over from airlines the responsibility for checking airline passengers' names against "greatly expanded" terrorist watch lists, the agency said.

"Secure Flight will enhance security for the nation's travelers while preserving the individual freedoms of each passenger," U.S. Navy Rear Admiral David M. Stone (retired), assistant secretary of Homeland Security, said in the release.

The change was recommended by the 9/11 Commission.

(The Washington File is a product of the Bureau of International Information Programs, U.S. Department of State. Web site: http://usinfo.state.gov)

Return to Public File Main Page

Return to Public Table of Contents