By Jim Berard (202) 226-5064
OPENING STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE JAMES L. OBERSTAR
SUBCOMMITTEE ON AVIATION HEARING "AVIATION SECURITY: AN UPDATE"
JULY 24, 2008
I want to thank Chairman Costello and Ranking Member Petri for holding this hearing on aviation security.
In the 1970s, aviation security focused on how to stop the proliferation of domestic hijackings. In 1972, in response to the rise in the number of hijackings, FAA ordered metal detector searches of passengers and X-rays of carry on bags. In 1974, the Congress imposed these requirements legislatively with the passage of the Anti-Hijacking Act of 1974.
As the United States government installed metal detectors to find guns and other weapons, the aviation security threat changed when a terrorist bomb tore apart Pan American World Airways flight 103, killing all 259 passengers and crew, and 11 residents of the small town of Lockerbie, Scotland. This terrorist act propelled the families of those victims on a mission to prevent future tragedies, culminating in the creation of the President’s Commission on Aviation Security and Terrorism, in which I served as a Commissioner.
In the Commission’s 1990 Report, we found the nation’s civilian aviation security system to be seriously flawed, and made 64 recommendations to correct those flaws, which culminated in the passage of the Aviation Security Improvement Act of 1990. In addition, spurred by initial concerns that a terrorist act was responsible for the TWA 800 explosion, President Clinton organized another commission, the 1996 White House Commission on Aviation Safety and Security, which made 31 recommendations for enhancing aviation security. Again, Congress acted swiftly and, in the 1996 FAA Reauthorization Act, included measures to heighten security.
Following the events of September 11, 2001, in which 4 aircraft were hijacked and then simultaneously used as weapons of destruction against the United States, the entire state of security for domestic and international commercial air service changed forever.
The universe to be protected is enormous and growing – in the United States alone, 769 million passenger enplanements annually, expected to grow to over 1 billion by 2016, with several hundred million bags to screen. Likewise, the magnitude of the threat is growing and changing.
The Aviation and Transportation Security Act made significant changes to aviation security policy, federalizing the screening workforce and requiring 100 percent screening of carry-on and checked baggage. The Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 required the newly created Secretary of Homeland Security and the Secretary of Transportation to work jointly on a comprehensive strategy on aviation security.
We have made great strides in aviation security. However, I have long expressed my concern about reports that although the TSA is deploying technology there is still no complete long-term strategy for integrating that equipment into a seamless security system. I look forward to hearing from the Government Accountability Office on TSA’s progress in developing and deploying checkpoint technologies, screening 100 percent of cargo on passenger aircraft, incorporating key stakeholders into coordinating activities and the implementation of Secure Flight. I commend the TSA for launching the new Checkpoint Evolution and appreciate the holistic approach to the checkpoint area this program represents. The TSA must take a comprehensive approach towards all of its security responsibilities to ensure that all areas of vulnerability are addressed.
With the appropriate counter-intelligence efforts and security implemented to the fullest extent, our citizens will forever enjoy the freedom of travel that only this great nation can provide. I look forward to hearing the testimony of the witnesses today.
STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE JERRY F. COSTELLO
AVIATION SECURITY: AN UPDATE
I welcome everyone to this Subcommittee hearing on Aviation Security: An Update.
I am pleased to welcome the Administrator of the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) and Assistant Secretary of Homeland Security, Kip Hawley, to this Subcommittee hearing.
September 11th, 2001, demonstrated weaknesses in the federal aviation security system that were due, in part, to a lack of national standards. When Congress passed the Aviation and Transportation Security Act (ATSA) the goal was to ensure that each airport would be following the same protocol including the same hiring, training, and testing standards. Subsequent legislation further sharpened that goal by requiring a comprehensive plan for aviation.
I believe we have taken positive steps to improve aviation security through technology upgrades and improvements; a federalized screener workforce; and a continued focus on a comprehensive approach to airline and airport security. Make no mistake – the traveling public is more secure today than before September 11, 2001.
For many traveling this summer, airport security can be a frustrating and anxiety ridden experience. However, TSA has been working with airports to introduce the Checkpoint Evolution also being referenced as “the checkpoint of the future,” which is being demonstrated at the BWI Airport. The program is supposed to introduce new technologies and create a calming checkpoint experience and I am interested in hearing more about this initiative.
Further, I have long been a proponent of in-line explosive detection systems (EDS) and have introduced legislation in the past to help generate additional revenue so that more airports can become equipped. In-line baggage screening systems have a much higher throughput than stand-alone systems. If we install in-line systems, more bags will be screened by explosive detection systems instead of less reliable, alternative methods.
Of the largest 29 airports in the country, 6 have full in-line EDS systems while 14 have partial EDS systems. Fifty-two airports in total have either full or partial systems and 407 of the federalized airports in the United States do not have in-line EDS system.
The TSA and airport operators rely on commitments in letters of intent (LOIs) as their principal method for funding the modification of airport facilities to incorporate in-line baggage screening systems. The TSA has issued eight LOIs to cover the costs of installing systems at nine airports for a total cost to the federal government of $957.1 million over four years.
In the past, the Government Accountability Office reports that TSA has estimated that in-line baggage screening systems at the nine airports that received LOI funding could save the federal government $1.3 billion over seven years. TSA further estimated that it could recover its initial investment in the in-line systems at these airports in a little over one year.
I am interested in hearing from TSA and GAO on what progress is being made on in-line EDS and where we can expect to see more installations of these systems to optimize our security at airports.
I am also interested in an update on domestic air cargo screening given that 100 percent of passenger air cargo must be screened by 2010.
Further, I have concerns with the pace at which TSA is moving to issue and implement security regulations for foreign repair stations. Under current law, the FAA will be prohibited from issuing new certificates to foreign repair stations, if TSA does not issue a final rule by August 3, 2008. I am interested to know if TSA plans to make this deadline and if not, what is a realistic timeline Congress can expect a rule.
Finally, I believe the Registered Travelers program and initiatives like CrewPASS are important programs to expedite frequent travelers and crew members through security checkpoints, allowing screeners to spend more time on others. Hearing how each of these programs are developing and expanding would be beneficial.
With that, I want to again welcome the witnesses today and I look forward to the testimony.
Before I recognize Mr. Petri for his opening statement, I ask unanimous consent to allow 2 weeks for all Members to revise and extend their remarks and to permit the submission of additional statements and materials by Members and witnesses. Without objection, so ordered.
###
