[Archive Home][Date Prev][Date Next][Index]
"Austin, Texas airport security plan in limbo"
Thursday, October 31, 2002
Airport security plan in limbo
Two months before deadline, Austin-Bergstrom still lacks strategy for
installing bomb detectors
By Kelly Daniel
THE AUSTIN (TX) AMERICAN-STATESMAN
Austin-Bergstrom International Airport has exactly two months left to meet
one of the biggest aviation security deadlines but has no approved plan, no
equipment and no idea whether it needs more workers to fulfill the
obligation.
The U.S. Transportation Security Administration still has not told
Austin-Bergstrom officials what strategy the airport may use to meet a Dec.
31 deadline that all checked bags must be screened through an explosives
detection system.
Airport, airline and federal officials in Austin are trying to finish a plan
and get that approved by federal security officials in Washington, D.C., in
time to order and install equipment and hire extra workers if necessary.
"Obviously, we are pushing that deadline hard," said Mike Scott, federal
security director at Austin-Bergstrom. "But it's our plan to meet that
deadline."
Austin-Bergstrom is hardly alone here. About 90 percent of U.S. commercial
airports will meet the deadline but not as Congress originally mandated
after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, aviation industry experts say.
Federal security agency officials insist they will meet their obligation and
have started installing the machines in 101 airports. But the agency is
agreeing to temporary fixes that will differ from airport to airport instead
of creating the uniform system the law envisioned.
The largest airports, including Dallas-Fort Worth International Airport, are
also behind and are scrambling to put in new equipment after working most of
the year to persuade lawmakers to push back the deadline.
"We are not going to realize it," said Steven Van Beek, senior vice
president at Airports Council International, an airport lobbying group.
"They are not going to realize it no matter what they do at 20 to 30 of the
top airports."
The federal security agency must screen bags for bombs through a system of
machines that use CAT-scan technology or test swabs for traces of explosive
materials.
Some airports' Dec. 31 solutions will not differ much from measures put in
place in January because the law left room for the possibility that the
machines would not be ready. Those steps include matching bags to passengers
on the first leg of flights, using bomb-sniffing dogs and conducting other
manual searches.
The uncertainty has traveler advocates and airline executives already
warning of massive delays on the tail end of the holiday travel season.
"That's the day they choke the system," said aviation consultant Mike Boyd,
president of The Boyd Group. Dec. 31 was "an inept and crackpot deadline to
start with. It was a promise that couldn't be met."
Bills that would delay the baggage deadline by as much as a year are stalled
in Congress, and next week's mid-term elections may doom their chances for a
vote.
The House already passed a bill that would push the deadline to Dec. 31,
2003, for all airports. The Senate's version, now in committee, would allow
waivers only for the 40 largest airports -- not Austin-Bergstrom.
The federal security agency is expected to meet its Nov. 19 deadline to
replace all private company screeners with federal workers, with 269 of the
429 airports covered as of Wednesday. Austin-Bergstrom got its corps of
screeners in September.
Austin-Bergstrom will have some sort of extra security by Dec. 31, said
airport and federal officials. But nothing will proceed until the federal
agency approves a plan.
Austin-Bergstrom handles an average of 11,800 bags a day. The busiest
airports handle upwards of 150,000 bags a day; Dallas-Fort Worth handles
55,000 daily.
The federal security agency originally estimated Austin-Bergstrom would need
17 of the minivan-size detection machines, but officials now agree that
number is too high. Scott would not say what the new number is because a
plan is not yet ready.
Austin-Bergstrom, like most airports, wanted to build the explosives
detecting machines into its existing baggage conveyor systems to save space
and time. But with the deadline nearing, the airport will have to place at
least some of the mammoth machines in the main terminal lobby near airline
ticket counters.
The airport also will have the microwave-size machines to detect traces of
explosives in the lobby as well.
Other unanswered questions loom for Austin-Bergstrom and other airports:
* Who will pay for all this? The large machines -- manufactured by just
two companies, InVision Technologies and L3 Communications -- cost about $1
million each. The smaller trace-detection machines cost about $100,000 each.
Airports, including Austin-Bergstrom, want the federal security agency to
foot the entire bill. But the federal government hasn't agreed.
* Who will be responsible for carrying the bags between the screening
machines and the conveyor belts behind ticket counters? The federal security
agency has said it won't provide workers for the task. Airlines are loath to
devote their employees to the job, particularly after massive layoffs.
* When will the permanent equipment be in place? Jim Smith,
Austin-Bergstrom executive director, estimates it will take 18 months "and
many millions of dollars" to build the machines into Austin-Bergstrom's
baggage system.
If time runs out and Austin-Bergstrom cannot get its explosives detectors in
their temporary places by Dec. 31, the airport and airlines would use other,
manual searches until the system is ready.
"We would look for those interim interim solutions," said Bruce Mills,
airport police chief and assistant director for security and operations.
"But I don't even want to go there."
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
*****************************************
Fair Use Notice
This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of political, human rights, economic, democracy and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.html. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
If you have any queries regarding this issue, please Email us at stepheni@cwnet.com