(The Washington Post published the following article by Don Phillips on September 9.)
WASHINGTON — When the United States began bombing al Qaeda camps in Afghanistan in October 2001, the railroad industry voluntarily suspended deliveries of dangerous chemicals to avoid possible terrorist reprisals. Within days, however, a shortage of chlorine left the Los Angeles water system within two days of shutting off service to millions of customers.
That was perhaps the first economic object lesson in the post-Sept. 11 era: Absolutely securing every movement of potentially dangerous cargo cannot be accomplished without disrupting the U.S. economy. Even relatively minor delays in the flow of goods in an economy that depends on just-in-time deliveries from around the world can cost billions of dollars.
Two years later, government and industry are still struggling with the question of how much they can do to secure the 11 billion tons of cargo — including 1.5 billion tons of hazardous material — that move through the United States each year without causing such economic damage that they, in effect, do terrorists’ work for them. Complicating the task is the sheer size and openness of the U.S. transportation system: 3.9 million miles of roads, more than 200,000 miles of railroad tracks, 600,000 bridges, 2.2 million miles of pipelines, 5,000 public-use airports and 300 ports, all with vulnerabilities.
“If we impose a security regime that kills an industry, we have failed in our job,” said Elaine Dezenski, director of maritime, land and cargo policy for the Transportation Security Administration.
The questions of how much security is possible and reasonable in cargo shipments will come up again today in a Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation hearing. The House has already passed a proposal by Reps. Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.) and Christopher Shays (R-Conn.) to require screening of all air cargo loaded into the belly of passenger planes, regardless of the cargo’s size. Under current rules, only cargo from a list of “known shippers” can be loaded aboard passenger planes, and shipments weighing less than 16 ounces are not subject to any screening.
TSA Administrator James M. Loy and airline industry leaders say no technology now exists to allow screening of all air cargo, and the only choice would be to stop belly cargo shipments — which the already money-losing airline industry says would cost it $4 billion in annual revenue and 27,000 jobs. Even if the technology were available to screen all air cargo, it would require the hiring of an additional 8,000 screeners, Dezenski said.
Industry executives say the Markey-Shays proposal is an example of well-intended but hasty reactions that could cause more damage than they prevent. “TSA understands that, and Congress is beginning to understand it, but there’s a lot of knee-jerk reaction,” said John A. Legler, security director for the American Trucking Associations.
Potential Target Focus
Loy espouses a “threat-based and risk-managed” approach to security in which cargo moved by legitimate known shippers is only spot-checked, while other cargo receives most of the attention, especially cargo identified as suspect by intelligence agencies.
Loy said his agency is applying lessons learned after the Sept. 11 attacks when legislation requiring more stringent screening of airline passengers and baggage was passed in haste and rules were imposed on tight deadlines, with the government only later facing their impact and how much they would cost.
“You have to draw a distinction between the impulsive reaction after 9/11 in the aviation sector” and cargo movement, Loy said.
John M. Meenan, executive vice president of the Air Transport Association, said the airline industry and the TSA are addressing cargo security concerns by being more careful about whom they accept shipments from, developing better trace technology to spot explosives, making greater use of bomb-sniffing dogs and opening some cargo at random.
Railroads, trucking companies and ports have beefed up security around their facilities with more guards, locks and gates. They have trained employees to watch for and report signs of potential terrorist activity, and worked with intelligence agencies to identify potential threats to their systems.
The TSA is expected to propose new rules this year for further transportation security enhancements. Under the Homeland Security Act passed late last year, criminal background checks will be required for transportation workers who deal with hazardous materials. The TSA also has a number of other security programs in the pipeline, including a universal identity card for all transport workers who require access to secure areas.
But congressional staffers complain frequently that the Department of Homeland Security is in a state of bureaucratic and budgetary confusion, constantly moving money from one program to another. And industry executives complain of receiving contradictory directives from two or more different offices.
The General Accounting Office, in a report prepared for Tuesday’s Senate hearing, generally confirmed these complaints and called on the departments of homeland security and transportation to clarify the roles of agencies dealing with transportation security. The GAO report said there has been a “breakdown in communication” between the two agencies.
The industry looks no farther than last Independence Day to find an example.
The Homeland Security Act included fireworks among the explosives regulated by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms. This led to confusion about whether railroad workers would have to undergo criminal background checks before they began delivering this year’s shipments of fireworks.
On Feb. 6, railroads placed an embargo on all fireworks while awaiting clarification, a blow to the fireworks industry because almost all fireworks move by rail. Fireworks manufacturers said they could find only two truck lines that would accept fireworks shipments. For four months, ATF and the Transportation Department wrangled over who had jurisdiction over railroad workers. Only after it became obvious that many July 4 celebrations would have to be canceled did the agencies clarify that fireworks could resume movement. The Transportation department retained rail worker jurisdiction.
Port Security Ordered
The TSA, after spending its first year concentrating primarily on airline security, is now turning more of its attention to cargo.
New Coast Guard regulations require ports to perform security assessments and submit detailed security plans by Jan. 1, 2004. The Coast Guard estimates ports will require $1.1 billion in security investment in the first year alone. But President Bush has sought no funds designated specifically for port security, and Congress appears set to approve $150 million in the fiscal 2004 budget.
Sens. Ernest F. Hollings (D-S.C.) and Patty Murray (D-Wash.) have accused the administration of failing to pay proper attention to port security. The Department of Homeland Security has already announced about $340 million in port security grants under earlier port security legislation, but Hollings terms that inadequate and calls some of the grants smoke-and-mirrors.
For instance, Hollings’s home port of Charleston was awarded $3.79 million by homeland security’s office of domestic preparedness, but the office designated $2 million of that for a helicopter for the Charleston County Sheriff’s Department, which could be used for Coast Guard officials and other federal agencies. Some time later, however, the department informed the sheriff’s office that it could not use the money for a helicopter even though the department made the designation, so the $2 million could not be spent. Hollings said he is still awaiting an explanation.
In nearby Jacksonville, Fla., the department announced a $3.4 million grant. It later told the port it could spend $333,000 on a video security system but not the remaining money, because the terms of the grant, as approved by the department, called for it to be spent for security gates. That would violate department rules, port officials said they were told.
Industry Initiatives
Amid that confusion, rail and truck lines have been trying to manage risks by moving forward with their own new security systems, using intelligence reports and the eyes and ears of experienced truck drivers, dispatchers, engineers, conductors and maintenance-of-way employees.
The American Trucking Associations and the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration are training a corps of selected truck drivers to watch for and report signs of potential terrorism, in addition to dangerous road conditions and accidents.
Already, the program has produced some unintended benefits, ATA’s Legler said. For instance, a truck driver thought it was suspicious that he delivered a full marine container to an apartment building. He called his dispatcher, who called police, who made a major drug bust.
The railroad industry has formed a 24-hour command center in Washington, and has representatives assigned to the CIA and the FBI intelligence organizations. The industry has done a study to identify vulnerable points in its systems and to set contingency plans for protection during times of threats. Tests are also being conducted at Aberdeen Proving Grounds in Maryland to determine how to strengthen and protect railcars carrying hazardous materials.
“We have had excellent cooperation from the intelligence community,” said Chuck Dettman, executive vice president of the Association of American Railroads.
Railroad sources said the railroad security system may have prevented at least one attack. Intelligence agencies reported that a group of suspected terrorists was looking for bridges to blow up in one major city, which the sources did not want to name. The railroad command center immediately dispatched guards to every bridge in the area until the threat was past.
The Customs Service, whose main enforcement responsibility was searching for drugs, has installed equipment at the Mexican and Canadian borders that is proving helpful in looking for terrorist threats, including the Vessel and Cargo Inspection System which uses gamma ray technology to produce an image of the inside of a truck or rail car. At seven points on the Mexican border and two on the Canadian border, an entire train can be imaged while passing through at 5 to 7 miles per hour.
But government and industry officials agree that, in the end, there is only so much they can do. Unlike airports and ports, trains and trucks operate over many thousands of miles of track and highways that are wide open and too costly to protect mile by mile. “You can’t protect all of anything all the time,” Dettman said. “But when you reverse the view of what a terrorist’s motives are and put that up against what your vulnerabilities are, then you narrow that seemingly impossible task down to make it more manageable.”