"FAA Issues Few Security Fines"

Tuesday, September 25, 2001

FAA Issues Few Security Fines


LOS ANGELES (AP) -- Federal inspectors who uncovered lapses in airport
security over the last decade proposed fines in just one-quarter of the
cases, a record critics say underscores weaknesses in oversight of the
system that protects the nation's air travelers. 

When the Federal Aviation Administration did move to fine airlines or
airports, it sought a total of just $28.5 million over the decade --
less than a major airline spends for a week's worth of jet fuel. And
those proposed fines often are reduced substantially in negotiations. 

Critics say the fines provide little incentive to the airlines to
tighten security. 

``It's cheaper to pay the fines, because they're negotiable, than to pay
for the corrective measures that would eliminate the need for fines,''
said Charles Slepian, a New York attorney who specializes in aviation
cases. 

While it has not been determined that lax screening played any role in
the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks on New York and Washington, the deadly
hijackings have focused the attention of the nation and Congress once
again on the state of security at the nation's airports. 

An Associated Press analysis of thousands of FAA enforcement records
from 1990 through 2000 found that, in most security breaches, the
private companies responsible for the safety of the flying public got
written warnings rather than fines. 

Until the attacks, the sanctions were considered effective, FAA
spokesman Paul Takemoto said. 

``Now, things definitely have changed,'' Takemoto said from Washington,
D.C. ``This is not the same environment we had before.'' 

Takemoto and other FAA officials refused to discuss the enforcement
statistics in detail or release the actual amount collected when fines
were imposed, citing security concerns. 

Over the decade, a period when air travel increased 43 percent to 666
million passengers per year, the FAA logged more than 19,500 lapses in
passenger screening and terminal security, but proposed fines in only 26
percent of the cases. 

The lapses ranged from record-keeping violations to letting passengers
check in without answering required questions about their baggage to
failing to detect weapons hidden in carry-on bags by government
inspectors. 

Rep. John Mica, a Florida Republican who is chairman of the House
Transportation Committee's subcommittee on aviation, defended the FAA's
enforcement record. He noted that until the terrorist attacks, no one
had attempted to hijack an airliner in the United States since 1991. 

``For the most part, the system -- even with all its failings -- has
worked for the last decade,'' Mica said. 

When the government ordered passenger screening in 1973 after a spate of
hijackings, it gave responsibility to the airlines, which typically
contract the job out to security companies. Now the airlines -- which
won $15 billion in emergency federal aid last week -- are using
congressional hearings to repeat previous calls for the government to
take over. 

Historically, the screeners hired by the airlines failed to detect 20
percent of dangerous objects hidden in baggage by inspectors, according
to a report last year by the General Accounting Office. 

In one headline-grabbing lapse, screeners failed to detect a 6-inch
hunting knife toted by an Alaska Airlines passenger on a San
Francisco-Seattle flight until the man took off his shirt and socks and
began cleaning his nails with it. 

When the FAA does propose fines, they're often reduced substantially in
negotiations. 

For example, when an undercover FAA agent managed to walk into a secure
area of Detroit Metropolitan Airport in January 1998, the agency
proposed an $11,000 fine. The complaint was settled for $6,000. 

In August 1997, Northwest Airlines flew the checked bag of a federal
aviation agent on a flight from Detroit to Toronto, though the agent
wasn't on that flight or any other headed to Toronto. Northwest was
fined $7,500, but settled the complaint for $5,000. 

Billie Vincent, former director of the FAA's office of civil aviation
security, said travelers would be better served if the agency took a
harder line on fines. 

``The FAA, while it should be a regulatory agency, frequently ends up
being what's called a 'coaching and counseling group,''' Vincent said. 

The AP examined records of the FAA's Enforcement Information System
covering all reported cases of enforcement actions by the agency at
airports from 1990 through 2000. Most enforcement actions resulted from
inspections or surveillance by the FAA, while some originated with local
law enforcement agencies. 

Some findings: 

--The FAA logged 19,532 enforcement actions against airlines and
airports for alleged violations of federal aviation safety rules and
procedures. Ten percent, or 2,026, involved weapons -- the majority of
them weapons and explosives hidden in bags by FAA inspectors to test the
system. 

--Fines were proposed most often for failing to comply with FAA security
directives, general screening lapses and unauthorized access to secure
areas. 

--The FAA also logged 28,360 security violations by passengers and other
individuals in airports during the same period. 

While the records show lapses in the system, they don't allow an overall
assessment of how effective the screening really is. For example,
there's no way to count weapons that passengers actually slipped
through.

 Do you have an opinion about this story?
Share it with other readers in our CAA Discussion Forums

http://www.californiaaviation.org/cgi-bin/dcforum/dcboard.cgi?conf=DCConfID8

*****************************************