Sought to Boost Efficacy and Lessen Hassles; Watching TV in Line

Source: Wall Street Journal
Author: Scott McCartney

Four years after Sept. 11, experts are considering ways to transform airport security checkpoints to make them less annoying for travelers and more effective at stopping potential terrorists.

The ideas being bandied about include everything from eliminating the searches for scissors and small knives to installing television monitors to entertain bored travelers while they stand in line.

The new thinking is being spurred by the fact that some of the efforts to beef up security in recent years either haven't been completely effective or have caused problems of their own. For example, airports have high failure rates in detecting banned items. Also, the congestion at screening checkpoints creates crowds of people that could themselves become terrorism targets.

"Screening points are very badly designed at present -- and may even be creating new opportunities" for terrorists, says Brian Flemming, the former head of transportation security in Canada. "The system is not yet doing what the public thinks it is doing -- and that is very troubling."

The government's Transportation Security Administration is talking about methods it hopes will be more effective. For example, work is progressing on a so-called trusted traveler program that would simplify screening for frequent fliers who pass a background check. The agency is also now pushing more "risk-based'' security that would target security screening more to threats rather than treating all travelers basically the same.

There have also been instances where suspicious passengers simply wander off before screening is completed. Also, everything screeners do is carried out in full public view and terrorists can study operations at busy periods and slow periods.

Kip Hawley, the TSA's new chief, floated a trial balloon during the summer when he suggested ending the hunt for scissors and small knives at screening checkpoints. These items are no longer considered hijacking threats by most security experts because airlines installed hardened, secure cockpit doors following the 2001 terrorist attacks and changed procedures to order pilots to not open the door should trouble break out. Security experts say that abandoning the search for small, sharp items will allow screeners to focus more on guns and bombs and speed up passenger flow through checkpoints. Mr. Hawley ran into a lot of flak for the suggestion, but it remains officially under review at TSA.

With TSA willing to change, security experts say it's a good time to seriously think about other inadequacies in the current design. At present, a low-paid contract employee is now the only check of government-issued IDs, consultants note, making it easy for someone on a terrorism no-fly list to travel with a fake ID. Another issue: when someone is identified as suspicious, there's no procedure for questioning the person or physical location to do it in. Also, there is some dispute as to whether TSA or local police are in charge of any investigation.

"The missing element is the ability to interview someone suspicious," said Rafi Ron, former director of security at Ben Gurion Airport in Tel Aviv and now a security consultant. "We cannot respond to the fact that a person is acting strangely."

There have also been instances where suspicious passengers simply wander off before screening is completed. Also, everything screeners do is carried out in full public view and terrorists can study operations at busy periods and slow periods. "They should not be given this advantage," says Mr. Flemming, now an adviser to a security company.

Mr. Flemming recently suggested to a group of North American airport executives that the U.S. needs an international design competition to come up with more-effective, less-expensive and more-customer-friendly airport security screening stations. He believes a new design can be "more humane and customer-friendly." TV monitors and electronic amusements might ease the wait for passengers. Secondary screening can be made easier; closed-circuit television monitoring can enhance security.

Some experts say too much effort is going into screening every checked piece of luggage for explosives, as Congress mandated, and not checking carry-on bags for explosives. The scrutiny of carry-ons done by plain-vanilla X-ray machines is inadequate, they say.

Staffing at checkpoints is also under fire. Bob Poole, an aviation-security expert at the Reason Foundation, says sometimes there seem to be too many screeners and other times there appears to be not enough. "TSA runs its allocation model once a year," says Mr. Poole. "This is a very dynamic industry, and things change. If you set your staffing only once a year, you're bound to have big mismatches."

Staffing at checkpoints has been an issue since TSA was created in 2002. With 45,000 employees and often a crowd of screeners on duty, the agency cynically became known as "Thousands Standing Around."

"The checkpoints we have are inherited," said TSA spokesman Christopher White. The federal agency is aware of concerns about current vulnerabilities, and "can't answer specifically" on those issues. "We are looking at technology for things we can do to improve," he said.

TSA says it is aggressively pursuing new technologies that will improve security screening such as machines that can detect hidden weapons and explosives hidden under clothing.