http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A8739-2005Mar4.html
washingtonpost.com Ground This Security System Sunday, March 6, 2005; Page B8 As a passenger screener at Washington-Dulles International Airport, I know that the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) makes security its top priority. But shouldn't customer service be a close second? Obviously, Dulles is busy. Last year about 23 million people flew in and out of the airport, an increase of 35 percent from the 17 million travelers who used Dulles in 2003. Last fall Mark O. Hatfield Jr., director of TSA's Office of Communications and Public Information, said, "Clearly, we have a commitment to moving those lines [at the airports] quickly, not making it an onerous part of your trip." On the third anniversary of Sept. 11, 2001, the TSA's federal security director at Dulles, John F. Lenihan, said, "Ensuring freedom of movement for people and commerce is a tremendous responsibility, one that requires us to balance security and to be as efficient as possible, while minimizing the disruption to people and goods moving in, out and throughout this country." Fine sentiments. Unfortunately, the lines of passengers have grown longer at Dulles during the past several months. One of the biggest problems there for travelers and screeners alike is the Computer Assisted Passenger Prescreening System (known as CAPPS II), authorized by Congress in response to the terrorist attacks. It uses certain criteria to flag travelers. Behavior it considers "suspect" includes buying a one-way ticket, paying for an airfare in cash or purchasing a ticket just days before a flight -- all actions easily avoided by terrorists. But screeners nevertheless are required to give extra attention to fliers who are flagged by these outdated criteria. Screeners must separate CAPPS II-selected fliers for additional screening, including pat-downs of the torso and manual searches of carry-on baggage that has been cleared by an X-ray operator. Screeners also must write down passenger information in a log, further slowing the process. Slowing the screening would be a wise investment of time if it improved security, but bad guys know not to buy one-way tickets or pay with cash, so what is gained by closer examination of passengers who simply needed a one-way ticket or didn't want to pay by credit card? At Dulles, the attrition rate among screeners is one of the highest in the country. This means fewer screeners are in place to deal with more and more passengers -- passengers whose progress is further hindered by the obsolete CAPPS II criteria. TSA managers at Dulles have been experimenting with lane configurations to deal exclusively with passengers selected for additional screening by CAPPS II. These experiments have not worked well, and they have been discontinued. Screeners, consequently, interact with more and more travelers who have missed their flights. Often this is because the airline canceled an earlier flight and rebooked the travelers on a later one, which causes these unfortunates to undergo additional screening under CAPPS II. That's right -- travelers who get bumped and rebooked must undergo additional screening, which sometimes causes them to miss their rebooked flight. One particularly galling aspect of this security facade is when screeners must subject members of the military -- in uniform and on active duty -- to additional screening because they are flying on a one-way ticket to or from service assignments overseas. Is it too much to ask for a rational alternative to these unnecessary and time-consuming procedures that do not improve security? -- Scott Wallace [EMAIL PROTECTED] [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Take a look at donorschoose.org, an excellent charitable web site for anyone who cares about public education! http://us.click.yahoo.com/_OLuKD/8WnJAA/cUmLAA/TySplB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> -------------------------- Want to discuss this topic? Head on over to our discussion list, [EMAIL PROTECTED] -------------------------- Brooks Isoldi, editor [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.intellnet.org Post message: [email protected] Subscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material whose use has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. OSINT, as a part of The Intelligence Network, is making it available without profit to OSINT YahooGroups members who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information in their efforts to advance the understanding of intelligence and law enforcement organizations, their activities, methods, techniques, human rights, civil liberties, social justice and other intelligence related issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes only. We believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish to use this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/osint/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
