MEETING THE AIRPORT SECURITY CHALLENGE
Report of the Secretary's Rapid Response Team on Airport Security
October 1, 2001
Extraordinary challenges require extraordinary measures. The terrorist attacks on America of September 11, 2001 require that we reform our Nation’s aviation security system in fundamental ways. On September 27, President Bush launched this process of reform by announcing his proposals for (1) an expanded federal air marshal program, (2) a $500 million federal grant program to strengthen aircraft security, (3) federal management of airport security and screening services, and (4) pending full implementation of federal oversight of airport security, the call-up of National Guard troops by State Governors to augment existing security staff at commercial airports nationwide.
To build on the President’s proposals
and make the Nation’s airports more secure, the Rapid Response Team has
concluded that:
This Team recognizes the need to
achieve a balance between improving airport security and minimizing air travel
disruptions. The freedom to travel not
only is a basic tenet of the American way of life, but also contributes to the
livelihood and economic well being of every American citizen. For this reason, as the Department of
Transportation and other federal agencies work to implement the recommendations
of this report, the airline and airport communities should be provided with the
opportunity to participate in the design and validation of new requirements as
they are formulated.
Finally, the Team wishes to underscore its
conviction that the measures proposed in the pages that follow can and should
be implemented in a way that is wholly consistent with America's commitment to
the protection of civil rights.
Recommendation
1: Establish
a new federal security agency, housed within the Department of Transportation,
to serve as the law enforcement arm for U.S. transportation, starting with
commercial aviation.
The Rapid Response Team applauds the
President’s decision to place under federal control the management of passenger
screening at U.S. airports. The Team
also believes that this function should be vested in a new federal
transportation security agency with full law enforcement authority. The agency's responsibilities for airport
security would include the supervision of all functions related to airport
passenger and baggage screening. The
screening function would be significantly higher in quality, while preserving
accessible air transportation as a competitive, vital, and essential component
of our economy.
Consistent with the President's
proposals, the new transportation security agency would establish new standards
for security operations; would perform intensive background checks and train
and test screeners and security personnel; would purchase and maintain all
equipment; and would work cooperatively with other law enforcement authorities
at the federal, state, and local levels.
The new security agency would hire,
train, and deploy to airports throughout the Nation a cadre of uniformed
federal transportation security officers.
Consistent with the President's proposals, these officers would oversee
and manage the full range of airport security functions to be carried out by
federal or contract personnel, including but not limited to:
The federal transportation security
agency would also have responsibility for:
The new security agency would provide
an effective response to the perceived passenger screening and airport access deficiencies
in the present structure. In
particular, the new office would be able to attract and retain a motivated
corps of law enforcement and security professionals. Likewise, security background checks would be conducted in
keeping with consistent federal standards, while training in security
requirements and procedures would be provided on a more comprehensive, uniform
basis. Most important, standards would
be consistently high throughout the Nation, allowing travelers to enjoy the
convenience of air travel with a heightened level of confidence in the
integrity of the system.
Recommendation 2: Integrate law
enforcement and national security intelligence data with airline and airport
systems, including passenger reservation, screening checks, employee background
checks, employee and passenger identification, and access protocols to aircraft
and secure areas within airports. This
could be carried out under the auspices of the Office of Homeland Security.
It is time to
change fundamentally the way our airports, airlines, and law enforcement and
intelligence communities use, share, and process law enforcement and national
security data. Doing so will provide
the underpinning for (1) rapid response by airline and airport operators to
terrorist threats; (2) an enhanced screening of airport and airline employees
and passengers, including the more effective use of the Computer Assisted
Pre-screening Passenger System; and (3) the application of new technologies for
identification purposes and to enhance security access at airports.
Recommendation 3: All airlines and airports should designate a
senior-level security officer and that officer should possess a security
clearance at a level required to act on sensitive intelligence information.
Airport
authorities and airlines must have a person at each airport in possession of a
security clearance at a level sufficient to enable effective interaction with
the law enforcement and intelligence communities and ensure that swift and
decisive action is taken in response to sensitive information that is made
available.
Recommendation
4:
New technologies for the positive identification of passengers, airport
workers and crews, detection of explosives, and more effective passenger and
baggage screening should be incorporated in airport security programs as soon
as practicable.
An array of new technologies exists
with the potential to enhance dramatically the quality of passenger and employee
identification, tracking, and verification.
Similar improvements in explosive detection technologies and passenger
and baggage screening are also being developed. Properly deployed, these tools can be a powerful weapon in the
war against terrorism. The Rapid
Response Team urges that available technologies be incorporated more widely in
our airport security program as soon as practicable.
Recommendation 5: The
Federal Aviation Administration should establish an Aviation Security
Technology Consortium, including public and private sector participants, to
identify, sponsor, and test new security-related technologies at our Nation’s
airports.
The Team urges the creation of an
Aviation Security Technology Consortium under the auspices of the FAA -- including
public and private sector members -- to identify, sponsor, and test new
security-related technologies at our Nation's airports.
Recommendation 6: The
Department of Defense should conduct an accelerated review of classified
technologies with potential application to aviation security with a view to
identifying and, consistent with national security requirements, declassifying
applications likely to be of value.
As part of
the Nation's effort to exploit new technologies in protecting aviation against
terrorism, it is essential that sensitive technologies currently subject to
government classification be reviewed to ensure that applications of possible
relevance to the aviation security challenge are not overlooked. Where such applications hold potential
promise and can be adapted without compromising national security, they should
be appropriately declassified.
IMPROVED PASSENGER SCREENING AND ACCESS CONTROL
Recommendation
7: Apply the Computer Assisted Passenger Pre-Screening System (CAPPS)
to all passengers.
CAPPS is a new process for analyzing
information known about a passenger in the carrier’s reservation system and
“scoring” the passenger either as a "selectee" or a
"non-selectee." This process allows
the security system to focus attention on a selected population of passengers
for each flight, while the majority of passengers process through the standard
security system. Application of this
new process to all passengers would materially strengthen overall security.
Because it is essential that all
passengers be subjected to a CAPPS screening prior to boarding, the Team
recommends that all passengers now be required to check in at a location where
CAPPS can be applied. It is preferable,
where possible, that selectee status be determined prior to the passenger's
processing through a screening checkpoint.
Airlines estimate, however, that 40-80 percent of passengers do not
check baggage and proceed directly to boarding gates for checkin there. The configuration of many major airports is
based on this pattern. Requiring all
passengers to check in prior to processing through passenger screening
checkpoints, therefore, is likely to clog the checkin process unacceptably at a
great many locations. Accordingly, the
Rapid Response Team believes that airlines and airports must work together with
the FAA to find effective ways of applying CAPPS to passengers prior to their
passage through screening checkpoints.
Recommendation
8: Each person traveling from an airport required to meet Federal
Aviation Regulation Part 107 (which governs security at airports with scheduled
commercial air carrier service) should be screened at an approved screening
checkpoint. In addition, all carry-on
items in the possession of each person traveling on a scheduled commercial air
carrier should be screened at an approved screening checkpoint. This provision should apply to all air
carrier employees and crews.
Under current provisions, air carrier
employees, such as baggage handlers, mechanics and ticket agents, may fly as
passengers without having been screened.
The Team recommends that this exception be terminated immediately, and
that every passenger, regardless of status, be required to pass through a
screening checkpoint prior to boarding.
Recommendation
9: Institute
improved processes for screening persons and carry-on items/baggage.
First and foremost, the public expects
visible improvements in passenger screening.
Second, the most effective way to fulfill the public’s expectation and
increase the probability of stopping an attack is to focus the highest level of
scrutiny on those passengers most likely to pose a genuine security risk. Third, the measures employed must cover the
widest possible array of threats, from handguns to explosives to knives, which
may or may not be detected by metal detector.
The Rapid Response Team has
recommended, in a submission restricted to official use only, ways of screening
both selectees and non-selectees consistent with these basic principles.
Recommendation
10: Carry-on
luggage should be limited to one carry-on bag and one personal article such as
a purse or briefcase. The existing
limitation on “passengers only” beyond screening checkpoints should be
continued.
The enhancements recommended in this
paper, particularly with respect to screening selectees, will require that more
time and attention be devoted to each piece of carry-on. By limiting the number of items needing to
be screened more time is made available to screen items carefully. Overall, a more thorough and less
time-pressured screening will increase effectiveness.
This recommendation logically
follows already enacted limitations on who may have access to sterile areas
through screening checkpoints. The
overriding concept is to limit the amount of screening to be done, thereby
having more time to do it well.
Recommendation
11: Until the new federal transportation security agency becomes
fully operational, each airport required to meet FAR Part 107 should station a
fixed-post law enforcement officer or National Guard member at each screening
checkpoint while it is in operation.
Currently, most screening checkpoints
in the United States are staffed by contract security personnel. Stationing a uniformed officer at the
Nation’s screening checkpoints will immediately improve public confidence in
the screening process and it will better enable timely law enforcement support
of the process.
Recommendation 12: Each airport
required to meet FAR Part 107 should revalidate identification and access media
that provide access to secured areas of airports.
Historically, accounting for access and
identification media has been difficult and an overall weakness in airport
access control systems. Already
underway, this action is prudent, as it simply establishes a clean baseline
from which future access media and identification enhancements may be built.
Recommendation
13: Each airport,
airline and related service company required to meet
FAR Part 107 and 108 should begin revalidation, under federal standards, of the
background and criminal history checks previously conducted on all persons who
have access to secured areas of the airport. This revalidation should
include checking each person against a coordinated federal security database
and notifying appropriate federal authorities of discrepancies or other
relevant information discovered during such revalidation processes.
Under current rules, persons have been
allowed access to secure areas of airports based on a review of their
employment history and, only when there are unexplained gaps in employment, a
criminal history check. The type of terrorist planning that was displayed
on September 11 indicates that this level of check is not adequate. By
checking individuals’ records against a database of criminal history, known
terrorists or persons illegally in the United States, it is more likely that
access to secured areas of airports can be protected against undesirable persons. It is important to point out that these
requirements will be largely dependent on implementation of Recommendation 2
(integration of law enforcement and intelligence information).
Recommendation
14: To the extent not already accomplished subsequent
to September 11, 2001, each airport operator required to meet FAR Part 107
should change codes on all access doors and re-key all lock systems. The codes should be changed within 72 hours
and the re-key should be accomplished within 30 days.
Like access
media and identification, lock and key control has historically been difficult
for airports to manage. It is prudent
to accomplish re-keying so that a new control baseline is established. Regarding access hardware that utilizes
codes, compromise of the codes is another recurring problem. Codes can be easily captured by observation
or even by the fact that careless employees sometimes write these codes on the
wall next to the access point.
Recommendation
15: The FAA should begin reviewing airport security programs
containing exclusive-use and tenant access control agreements to determine the
necessity of, and reasonable time frame for modification of, such agreements in
order to ensure that a single entity is responsible for security in all areas
of the airport.
Currently,
the diffusion of responsibility for airport security among the FAA, the
airports, and airport tenants creates an unacceptable level of fragmentation
and potential loss of control over security management. Some fixed-based operator tenants, for
example, do not have security personnel, resulting in weak or little monitoring
of access to secured areas.
Recommendation
16: There is an urgent need to establish a voluntary means by which
passengers might submit to an effective pre-screening regimen and thereby
qualify for more expedited processing.
As passenger volume returns to normal
levels, more efficient ways of moving passengers through the security system to
the aircraft will be required. The Team believes that there is an urgent
need to establish a nationwide program for the voluntary pre-screening of
passengers, together with the issuance of “smart” credentials (taking
advantage of biometric and other emerging technologies to validate personal
identity). Passengers whose identities
and backgrounds have been validated in advance through such a program could be
processed, upon presentation of their credentials, through a less intense security
process, enabling security professionals
to focus their resources more effectively.
Even prior to the establishment of such a program, the use of U.S.
passports as a discriminator should be considered as a possible means of
facilitating the passenger screening process.
These approaches would streamline passenger screening without
compromising security requirements.
[1] Issues arising in connection with general aviation,
including the operation of corporate aircraft, are beyond the scope of this
report. The Team recommends, however,
that a similar initiative be undertaken to explore ways of further enhancing
the security of general aviation facilities and operations.