Tightened Security Measures for Airports Point to Industry Transforming Itself by Anna Gawel Few can deny that Sept. 11 forever changed the face of flying in America. The terrorist attacks left in their wake a beleaguered airport system struggling to survive under the weight of massive security overhauls. Airports across the nation, including the Washington, D.C., area, were forced to reassess every detail of their operation: Screening methods had to quickly be improved, procedures rewritten, and security drastically revamped. Ten months later, the struggles are far from over, but what has emerged is a picture of resilience, recovery and, ultimately, a transformed industry. Many travelers have already encountered this transformation at area airports, starting the moment they step into the terminal. Security officials are now visible on virtually every corner. Random searches have become the norm. Only ticketed passengers are allowed beyond checkpoints. Federal employees will eventually replace all privately hired screeners, and behind the scenes, absolutely every piece of baggage will undergo some type of screen ing process. Above all, rules that were once lax, such as the number of carry-on bags permitted on the plane or what items could be transported, are now vigorously enforced. All of these changes can be traced to a much larger shift in national policy. On Nov. 19, President George W. Bush signed the Aviation and Transportation Security Act (ATSA). This momentous piece of legislation transferred authority for protecting the nationís 429 commercial airports from the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) into the hands of a newly created federal agencyóthe Transportation Security Administration (TSA), a branch of the Department of Transportation headed by U.S. Secretary of Transportation Norman Y. Mineta. The act also set strict deadlines for instituting a slew of fundamental changes, posing a logistical challenge for TSA, airport and airline workers alike. The first major deadline came just 60 days after passage of the ATSA and called for airlines to begin screening all checked baggage before loading it onto the plane. This Jan. 18 deadline placed a quite a strain on airline workersóespecially considering that before Sept. 11, less than 10 percent of the 1.4 billion bags flown on domestic airlines annually were ever screened for explosives. Despite many doubts, the airlines did meet the ATSAís deadline. However, as TSA spokeswoman Deirdre OíSullivan pointed out, that Jan. 18 deadline was only a starting date from which airlines would begin the painstaking task of screening every piece of luggage. On. Feb. 17, that burden shifted to the TSA, which officially took charge of all screening duties. Once again, however, this is only a starting date for a much larger conversion. About 30,000 federal screeners are scheduled to roll out in phases at various airports over the next six months, eventually replacing all privately hired screeners by Nov. 19, the one-year anniversary of the ATSA. Until then, the airlinesí private screeners will remain at most airports. The current screening process for checked baggage involves one of four methods: bomb-sniffing dogs (or ìcanine explosive detection unitsî), hand searches, explosive detection systems, or cross-checking baggage with passenger lists, otherwise known as bag matching. Each method has its own strengths and weaknesses. Hand searches, for example, have the benefit of human intelligence but are also prone to human error. On the other hand, bomb-sniffing dogs and explosion detection devices are highly effective in pinpointing traces of explosives, but both are in short supply at most airports. Bag matching is probably the easiest and most commonly used methodóthe international carriers already use itóbut it too is marred by one important flaw: It fails to prevent suicide bombers. For security reasons, officials at Dulles International, Ronald Reagan National and Baltimore/Washington International (BWI) would not reveal which methods they rely upon, but that decision is for the most part up to the individual airlines, which are in turn directly monitored by the TSA and the federal security directors that are being hired to oversee airport security matters. By yearís end though, all airlines will be required to use explosive detection machines to screen checked baggageóin theory eliminating the shortcomings of dogs and people, although airport officials say the other three methods will still most likely be used in combination with the explosive detection machines. These machines come in two forms: explosive detection systems (EDS)ólarge, bulky machines that use x-ray and CAT-scan technology to weed out explosivesóand explosive trace detection equipment (EDT)óportable devices that workers can maneuver to detect explosive residue. According to OíSullivan, the large EDS machines are far more efficient than their smaller counterparts and, in the long run, are actually less expensive because fewer workers are needed to man them. However, EDS machines frequently yield false alarms (shampoo can trigger an alarm), and the initial costs of the systems are significantly higher than EDT devicesó$1 million each as opposed to $40,000 each. The TSA will foot the bill for the explosive detection equipment, but one question still looms large for airport officials: Who will pay to make room for the equipment? The handheld EDT devices are not an issue, but installation of the EDS machines, which are about the size of a minivan, could entail extensive renovations at airports. Currently only a small number of EDS machines are scattered throughout the nation and only a handful are in place at Washington-area airports, according to airport officials. At this point, responsibility for the renovations falls squarely on the airportsóto the tune of $2 billion, which is where the inspector generalís office puts the latest construction costs. That has many airport officials in a bind. ìThe renovations are a source of an ongoing discussion with the TSA and the federal government to figure out whoís going to pick up the tab for all this,î said Jonathan Gaffney, spokesman for the Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority (MWAA), which oversees Dulles and National. As of now, the TSA is leaning toward the smaller devices, proposing to buy 4,700 of the laptop-size EDT devices and 1,100 EDS machines to help airports meet the federally mandated deadline for having all explosive detection systems in place by the end of the year. Some renovations will of course be inevitable and the subject remains a sore spot. Another issue that has been drawing fire is the unparalleled growth of the TSA. The agency recently unveiled plans to hire a total of 67,000 workers, more than double its initial estimate of 30,000. The move spawned a raft of criticism in Congress where some members, stunned by the hefty spike, are calling on more oversight. At 67,000 employees, the TSA would dwarf the entire FAA. The increase is especially impressive, considering the agencyís humble beginningsóìRemember, we started from nothing. In January, we only had just 13 permanent employees,î OíSullivan said. The 67,000 hires would include the 30,000 federal screeners that will supplant private screeners; however, there is an important distinction to keep in mind: Those 30,000 hires only represent a fraction of the future screener workforce. According to OíSullivan, they will screen passengers and their bags at security checkpoints, but an undisclosed number of additional federal workers will be hired to screen the baggage that remains outside the publicís view. The issue of funding for the TSA has also spurred some controversy. The agency is requesting an additional $4.4 billion from the federal government this yearóon top of the $2.4 billion that has already been given out. Given that total costs for 2002 could reach $6.8 billion, some question the TSAís ability to keep next yearís proposed budget of $4.8 billion in check. Meanwhile, amid the financial and hiring wrangling, area airports have been adjusting to life post-Sept. 11. Initially frazzled and to a degree financially scarred, Dulles, National and BWIóthe big three among Washington-area airportsóare slowly recouping their losses. Financially, Reagan National has been hardest hit. Tied down by months of restrictions because of its close proximity to Washington landmarks, the airport resumed its pre-Sept. 11 flight paths this past April after months of lobbying by airport and other officials. That means a curfew on flights before 7 a.m. and after 10 p.m. has been lifted, larger planes will once again be permitted, flight paths will no longer be diverted through residential neighborhoods, and, above all, the airport can resume its pre-Sept. 11 flight levelsóabout 800 per day. However, Gaffney, the MWAA spokesman, warned that even though ìall the rules are in place, it will take time for National to completely return to normal.î As of April, the airport was still running about 20 percent below its total capacity because of lower passenger demand. Dulles and BWI by comparison have fared somewhat better. As of April, Dulles was operating at 85 percent of its pre-Sept. 11 levels, and the airport is pushing forward with most of its construction plansóit recently completed a five-story garage, with a second garage scheduled to be opened this summer, and is working on an underground train system to replace the current mobile lounges that transport passengers to and from the terminal and midfield concourses. Tara Hamilton, an MWAA spokeswoman, said that the tide is slowly turning at Dulles and National. ìAll airports have felt the impact of the terrorist attacks, including us, but we are seeing passengers coming back,î she said. ìWe are about 25 percent below in terms of [traffic] last year, but of course thatís understandable after the events of Sept. 11.î Hamilton said ìthe signs are goodî for a resurgence of travelers with the summer season approaching. She also pointed to recently released Department of Transportation projections showing that although profit levels will remain low throughout 2002, by 2003, the industry is actually expected to rebound and experience a 4 percent growth rate. At BWI, hopes are also high that the recovery will continue into next year. Traffic at the airport is still below last yearís levelsóas of May it was off by about 7 percentóbut it has steadily improved since October and is keeping pace with industry standards. On another front, BWI has been chosen by the TSA to be the national test case for the first batch of federal screeners. About 200 government-trained baggage screeners arrived at BWI in late April, marking the first round of BWIís conversion to an all-federal security workforce. Thus far, the TSA has announced plans to recruit federal screeners at four major airports, and it will deploy site assessment teams at up to 120 airports by the first week of July. However, officials have not released exact dates for when screeners will be sent to Dulles or Reagan National. BWI has also successfully managed to cut wait times while beefing up its security, thanks in part to its reconfiguration of lines and security areas to make everything more efficient and user-friendly. The airport actually borrowed some of its ideas from Disney theme parks. In fact, Disney is just one of the companies being tapped by the TSA to figure out better ways to cope with long lines, unhappy passengers and other potential stumbling blocks. ìWeíd like as much as we can get from private industry because it is in everyoneís best interest to make sure Sept. 11 never happens again,î said TSA spokeswoman OíSullivan. The switch to federal screeners is also proving to be a boom for private industry. Companies such as Lockheed Martin Corp. and NCS Pearson Inc. have been awarded multi-million dollar contracts to hire, train and supervise job candidates. However, the verdict is still out as to whether or not all of these changes will actually avert another terrorist strike. The TSA was dealt a major blow in March when a confidential memo outlining widespread security failures at 32 airports was leaked to the media. According to USA Today, which uncovered the memo, investigators conducted 783 tests at airport screening checkpoints and hundreds of tests in other areas under orders by President Bush. The results were alarming: Investigators carried knives past screeners more than 70 percent of the time. Screeners failed to detect simulated explosive devices in 60 percent of the tests, and screeners failed to spot guns 30 percent of the timeóall despite the heightened security. Bombarded by questions regarding the security breaches, the TSA has refused to give out specifics on which airports were investigated and what follow-up investigations may be taking place. OíSullivan would only say that ìfollowing Sept. 11, we have been working very hard to improve security. Now that we know where some of these problems occurred, we know more about what specifically to improve.î The improvements are part of an ongoing effort by law enforcement officials as well. A month after the leaked memo, authorities arrested close to 100 workers at Dulles and National for gaining access into restricted areas and another 140 for lying on their applications. Similar arrests have occurred in other cities and are part of a broader national sweep called ìOperation Tarmac.î These types of investigations will undoubtedly continue in the near future, testing an airport system that seems to have weathered the initial storm of Sept. 11 but is still clearly evolving to meet todayís security needs. Anna Gawel is the assistant editor for The Washington Diplomat.