U.S. House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure
U.S. Rep. Don Young, Chairman

 

Contact:  Steve Hansen (Communications Director)  (202) 225-7749

               Justin Harclerode (Communications Assistant)  (202) 226-8767

To:  National Desk/Transportation Reporter

December 7, 2001

 

Aviation Security Experts Say Meeting Deadlines

On New Baggage Explosive Detection Screening May Be Difficult;

Bush Administration Pledges Do Everything Possible To Implement

New Security Systems By December 31, 2002 Deadline

 

            Washington, D.C. - Aviation security experts with experience in implementing major baggage security screening programs testified today that it may be difficult for the United States to meet the new deadlines requiring the explosive detection screening of all checked bags on commercial flights.

 

            The testimony came during a hearing today by the U.S. House Subcommittee on Aviation.

 

“There is no doubt that meeting the deadline for deployment will be a difficult task,” U.S. Rep. John Mica (R-FL), the Chairman of the Subcommittee said during his opening statement.  “Few agencies have ever been directed to undertake such a formidable assignment. 

“Even at the time we were considering the bill, there was concern about the deadline.  If it were solely up to me, the directives mandated by the legislation would have been different.  But at the time, it was apparent that some in Congress, the media, and the public were not in the mood for an extended debate on this issue.

“Now, I am concerned that the pressure to meet the December 31, 2002 deadline will cause DOT to spend huge amounts of money quickly without any assurance that the equipment they buy will detect the explosives that could bring down an aircraft.  Unfortunately, that was the approach taken after TWA 800 in 1996.

            “We need only remind ourselves of the $441 million that was spent on equipment since 1996.  Some of that equipment worked, some did not work, and some sat idle.  We cannot afford to repeat those mistakes,” Mica said.

 

Ian Hutcheson, Head of Group Security for BAA in the United Kingdom, outlined how his security firm installed 100 percent screening systems “virtually from scratch “ at seven airports in the United Kingdom at a cost of just over $300 million.

Hutcheson said after making several logistical modifications the implementation time for the airports ranged from nine to 30 months at different terminals at Heathrow.

“These time scales assume the development of a design brief, that a baggage handling contractor is available, that equipment is available from manufacturers, and includes overcoming issues of baggage integration, confidence trials and commissionings,” Hutcheson said.

 

President Bush recently signed into law the “Aviation and Transportation Security Act” which establishes firm deadlines for the screening of checked baggage.  It also transferred responsibility for aviation security from the FAA to a new Transportation Security Administration (TSA) within DOT.

Within 60 days, the law requires that all checked baggage be screened by any approved means.  This could include, for example, the use of explosive detection machines where available, matching bags to passengers, profiling high-risk passengers with additional searches of their baggage, hand searches, or the use of bomb-sniffing dogs.

By December 31, 2002, the law requires that explosive detection systems be deployed to screen all checked baggage.  The law does not actually require that all checked baggage be screened by those machine on that date - although Congressional authors of the legislation have stated that this was their desire - only that the explosive detection machines be deployed by that date and when enough machines are deployed, all checked baggage must be screened by them.  Until enough machines are in place, alternative means, such as those previously mentioned above, must be used to screen checked baggage.

           

            Roger W. Rimington, Chief Aviation Security Consultant for Glenealy International Ltd. in the United Kingdom, said despite the “enormity of this task, given the 300-plus qualifying airports in the United States” he believed the deadline could be met - if explosive detection systems (EDS) can be manufactured in time, if the terminals don’t require significant structural modifications and if the training for screening personnel can begin immediately.

 

            Steve Zaidman, Associate Administrator for Research and Acquisitions at the Federal Aviation Administration, told the Committee:  “In order to meet the December 31, 2002 goal of 100 percent EDS screening of all checked bags, over 2,000 EDS must be deployed - that’s over 1,800 more than we currently have.

            “Today, products of two EDS vendors have been certified and variations of these products are currently going through the certification process.  Consequently, the Department and Transportation Security Administration will need to work with the companies that manufacture these machines to see how quickly they can produce more of these systems and work must continue to explore all new technologies being developed by manufacturers for the next generation of screening technologies.”

 

Chairman Mica’s Opening Statement

            Today, we begin our oversight of the Aviation and Transportation Security Act that was passed last month.  This hearing will focus on the law’s mandate to deploy explosive detection systems to screen all checked baggage by December 31, 2002.

Before we passed that law, I don’t think most people were aware of how little checked baggage was actually subject to inspection.

            Until recently, checked baggage was screened by a profiling system that resulted in the actual inspection of only a small percentage of the bags.

            The Security Act we passed mandates that we make dramatic changes in that process.  It establishes an aggressive schedule to deploy explosive detection systems at all airports by the end of next year.  This is one year sooner than was required by the House-passed version and much sooner than the FAA had originally planned. 

While the public should understand that the Congressional deadline might be difficult to meet, there are other measures in place now, such as strengthened cockpit doors, which have significantly improved passenger safety. 

To meet the December 31, 2002 deadline, some experts have estimated that it may require more than 2,000 machines at a cost that could exceed $5 billion.  In addition, these machines will not operate by themselves. There will be substantial additional costs to man them.

There is no doubt that meeting the deadline for deployment will be a difficult task.  Few agencies have ever been directed to undertake such a formidable assignment. 

Even at the time we were considering the bill, there was concern about the deadline.  If it were solely up to me, the directives mandated by the legislation would have been different.  But at the time, it was apparent that some in Congress, the media, and the public were not in the mood for an extended debate on this issue.

Now, I am concerned that the pressure to meet the December 31, 2002 deadline will cause DOT to spend huge amounts of money quickly without any assurance that the equipment they buy will detect the explosives that could bring down an aircraft.  Unfortunately, that was the approach taken after TWA 800 in 1996.

            We need only remind ourselves of the $441 million that was spent on equipment since 1996.  Some of that equipment worked, some did not work, and some sat idle.  We cannot afford to repeat those mistakes.

It is not enough to simply buy whatever is available in order to meet the deadline in the law.  The Security Act also authorized $50 million for research and development.  I would hope that DOT would use these funds to ensure that we develop the very best explosive detection systems possible.

            The manufacturers of explosive detection systems have displayed their various technologies on Capitol Hill.  Some of them will testify today.

            But before we proceed in haste, we need to have a plan—one that insures that not only is every bag screened, but also that the screening actually detects the articles that pose a threat to passengers and crew.

            I believe the British experience can be instructive.   As a result of the Pan Am 103 tragedy, they made dramatic expenditures and worked several years to achieve 100% baggage screening.  Furthermore, we must recognize that it is not just the machines that are expensive.  Integrating those machines into the existing baggage delivery system will take a great deal of time and money.

            While the UK experience may be informative, rather than retrofit several dozen airports, the United States faces the formidable task of deploying new technology at hundreds of locations.

            Today we will hear from witnesses that have actually participated in converting airports to a 100% checked baggage screening requirement.  We are pleased to have two witnesses from Great Britain here to give us the benefit of their experience.  I would like to thank them for traveling such a long distance to be with us today.

            We also have the key manufacturers of bomb detection equipment, 2 who have certified systems and 2 who will be seeking certification of their systems.

Finally, I would like to thank Steve Zaidman of the FAA for taking time out from his work on STARS to share with us the current plans for meeting the statutory deadline.

            I would also like to particularly recognize Sam Graves from Missouri and Mark Kirk from Illinois.   They both worked diligently to ensure that strong provisions were included in this historic legislation to deal with checked baggage.”

 

#    #    #