The Congressional Record is a unique source of public documentation. It started in 1873, documenting nearly all the major and minor policies being discussed and debated.
“AIRPORT SECURITY IMPROVEMENT ACT OF 2000” mentioning the U.S. Dept. of Transportation was published in the House of Representatives section on pages H10523-H10527 on Oct. 23, 2000.
The publication is reproduced in full below:
AIRPORT SECURITY IMPROVEMENT ACT OF 2000
Mr. LaTOURETTE. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the Senate bill (S. 2440) to amend title 49, United States Code, to improve airport security, as amended.
The Clerk read as follows:
S. 2440
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Airport Security Improvement Act of 2000''.
SEC. 2. CRIMINAL HISTORY RECORD CHECKS.
(a) Expansion of FAA Electronic Pilot Program.--
(1) In general.--Not later than 2 years after the date of enactment of this Act, the Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration shall develop, in consultation with the Office of Personnel Management and the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the pilot program for individual criminal history record checks (known as the electronic fingerprint transmission pilot project) into an aviation industry-wide program.
(2) Limitation.--The Administrator shall not require any airport, air carrier, or screening company to participate in the program described in subsection (a) if the airport, air carrier, or screening company determines that it would not be cost effective for it to participate in the program and notifies the Administrator of that determination.
(b) Application of Expanded Program.--
(1) Interim report.--Not later than 1 year after the date of enactment of this Act, the Administrator shall transmit to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate and the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure of the House of Representatives a report describing the status of the Administrator's efforts to utilize the program described in subsection (a).
(2) Notification concerning sufficiency of operation.--If the Administrator determines that the program described in subsection (a) is not sufficiently operational 2 years after the date of enactment of this Act to permit its utilization in accordance with subsection (a), the Administrator shall notify the committees referred to in paragraph (1) of that determination.
(c) Changes in Existing Requirements.--Section 44936(a)(1) of title 49, United States Code, is amended--
(1) in subparagraph (A) by striking ``, as the Administrator decides is necessary to ensure air transportation security,'';
(2) in subparagraph (D) by striking ``as a screener'' and inserting ``in the position for which the individual applied''; and
(3) by adding at the end the following:
``(E) Criminal history record checks for screeners and others.--
``(i) In general.--A criminal history record check shall be conducted for each individual who applies for a position described in subparagraph (A), (B)(i), or (B)(ii).
``(ii) Special transition rule.--During the 3-year period beginning on the date of enactment of this subparagraph, an individual described in clause (i) may be employed in a position described in clause (i)--
``(I) in the first 2 years of such 3-year period, for a period of not to exceed 45 days before a criminal history record check is completed; and
``(II) in the third year of such 3-year period, for a period of not to exceed 30 days before a criminal history record check is completed,
if the request for the check has been submitted to the appropriate Federal agency and the employment investigation has been successfully completed.
``(iii) Employment investigation not required for individuals subject to criminal history record check.--An employment investigation shall not be required for an individual who applies for a position described in subparagraph (A), (B)(i), or (B)(ii), if a criminal history record check of the individual is completed before the individual begins employment in such position.
``(iv) Effective date.--This subparagraph shall take effect--
``(I) 30 days after the date of enactment of this subparagraph with respect to individuals applying for a position at an airport that is defined as a Category X airport in the Federal Aviation Administration approved air carrier security programs required under part 108 of title 14, Code of Federal Regulations; and
``(II) 3 years after such date of enactment with respect to individuals applying for a position at any other airport that is subject to the requirements of part 107 of such title.
``(F) Exemption.--An employment investigation, including a criminal history record check, shall not be required under this subsection for an individual who is exempted under section 107.31(m) of title 14, Code of Federal Regulations, as in effect on the date of enactment of this subparagraph.''.
(d) List of Offenses Barring Employment.--Section 44936(b)(1)(B) of title 49, United States Code, is amended--
(1) by inserting ``(or found not guilty by reason of insanity)'' after ``convicted'';
(2) in clause (xi) by inserting ``or felony unarmed'' after
``armed'';
(3) by striking ``or'' at the end of clause (xii);
(4) by redesignating clause (xiii) as clause (xv) and inserting after clause (xii) the following:
``(xiii) a felony involving a threat;
``(xiv) a felony involving--
``(I) willful destruction of property;
``(II) importation or manufacture of a controlled substance;
``(III) burglary;
``(IV) theft;
``(V) dishonesty, fraud, or misrepresentation;
``(VI) possession or distribution of stolen property;
``(VII) aggravated assault;
``(VIII) bribery; and
``(IX) illegal possession of a controlled substance punishable by a maximum term of imprisonment of more than 1 year, or any other crime classified as a felony that the Administrator determines indicates a propensity for placing contraband aboard an aircraft in return for money; or''; and
(5) in clause (xv) (as so redesignated) by striking
``clauses (i)-(xii) of this paragraph'' and inserting
``clauses (i) through (xiv)''.
SEC. 3. IMPROVED TRAINING.
(a) Training Standards for Screeners.--Section 44935 of title 49, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:
``(e) Training Standards for Screeners.--
``(1) Issuance of final rule.--Not later than May 31, 2001, and after considering comments on the notice published in the Federal Register for January 5, 2000 (65 Fed. Reg. 559 et seq.), the Administrator shall issue a final rule on the certification of screening companies.
``(2) Classroom instruction.--
``(A) In general.--As part of the final rule, the Administrator shall prescribe minimum standards for training security screeners that include at least 40 hours of classroom instruction before an individual is qualified to provide security screening services under section 44901.
``(B) Classroom equivalency.--Instead of the 40 hours of classroom instruction required under subparagraph (A), the final rule may allow an individual to qualify to provide security screening services if that individual has successfully completed a program that the Administrator determines will train individuals to a level of proficiency equivalent to the level that would be achieved by the classroom instruction under subparagraph (A).
``(3) On-the-job training.--In addition to the requirements of paragraph (2), as part of the final rule, the Administrator shall require that before an individual may exercise independent judgment as a security screener under section 44901, the individual shall--
``(A) complete 40 hours of on-the-job training as a security screener; and
``(B) successfully complete an on-the-job training examination prescribed by the Administrator.''.
(b) Computer-Based Training Facilities.--Section 44935 of title 49, United States Code, is further amended by adding at the end the following:
``(f) Accessibility of Computer-Based Training Facilities.--The Administrator shall work with air carriers and airports to ensure that computer-based training facilities intended for use by security screeners at an airport regularly serving an air carrier holding a certificate issued by the Secretary of Transportation are conveniently located for that airport and easily accessible.''.
SEC. 4. IMPROVING SECURED-AREA ACCESS CONTROL.
Section 44903 of title 49, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:
``(g) Improvement of Secured-Area Access Control.--
``(1) Enforcement.--
``(A) Administrator to publish sanctions.--The Administrator shall publish in the Federal Register a list of sanctions for use as guidelines in the discipline of employees for infractions of airport access control requirements. The guidelines shall incorporate a progressive disciplinary approach that relates proposed sanctions to the severity or recurring nature of the infraction and shall include measures such as remedial training, suspension from security-related duties, suspension from all duties without pay, and termination of employment.
``(B) Use of sanctions.--Each airport operator, air carrier, and security screening company shall include the list of sanctions published by the Administrator in its security program. The security program shall include a process for taking prompt disciplinary action against an employee who commits an infraction of airport access control requirements.
``(2) Improvements.--The Administrator shall--
``(A) work with airport operators and air carriers to implement and strengthen existing controls to eliminate airport access control weaknesses by January 31, 2001;
``(B) require airport operators and air carriers to develop and implement comprehensive and recurring training programs that teach employees their roles in airport security, the importance of their participation, how their performance will be evaluated, and what action will be taken if they fail to perform;
``(C) require airport operators and air carriers to develop and implement programs that foster and reward compliance with airport access control requirements and discourage and penalize noncompliance in accordance with guidelines issued by the Administrator to measure employee compliance;
``(D) assess and test for compliance with access control requirements, report findings, and assess penalties or take other appropriate enforcement actions when noncompliance is found;
``(E) improve and better administer the Administrator's security database to ensure its efficiency, reliability, and usefulness for identification of systemic problems and allocation of resources;
``(F) improve the execution of the Administrator's quality control program by January 31, 2001; and
``(G) require airport operators and air carriers to strengthen access control points in secured areas (including air traffic control operations areas) to ensure the security of passengers and aircraft by January 31, 2001.''.
SEC. 5. PHYSICAL SECURITY FOR ATC FACILITIES.
(a) In General.--In order to ensure physical security at Federal Aviation Administration staffed facilities that house air traffic control systems, the Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration shall act immediately to--
(1) correct physical security weaknesses at air traffic control facilities so the facilities can be granted physical security accreditation not later than April 30, 2004; and
(2) ensure that follow-up inspections are conducted, deficiencies are promptly corrected, and accreditation is kept current for all air traffic control facilities.
(b) Reports.--Not later than April 30, 2001, and annually thereafter through April 30, 2004, the Administrator shall transmit to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate and the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure of the House of Representatives a report on the progress being made in improving the physical security of air traffic control facilities, including the percentage of such facilities that have been granted physical security accreditation.
SEC. 6. EXPLOSIVES DETECTION EQUIPMENT.
Section 44903(c)(2) of title 49, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:
``(C) Manual process.--
``(i) In general.--The Administrator shall issue an amendment to air carrier security programs to require a manual process, at explosive detection system screen locations in airports where explosive detection equipment is underutilized, which will augment the Computer Assisted Passenger Prescreening System by randomly selecting additional checked bags for screening so that a minimum number of bags, as prescribed by the Administrator, are examined.
``(ii) Limitation on statutory construction.--Clause (i) shall not be construed to limit the ability of the Administrator to impose additional security measures on an air carrier or a foreign air carrier when a specific threat warrants such additional measures.
``(iii) Maximum use of explosive detection equipment.--In prescribing the minimum number of bags to be examined under clause (i), the Administrator shall seek to maximize the use of the explosive detection equipment.''.
SEC. 7. AIRPORT NOISE STUDY.
(a) In General.--Section 745 of the Wendell H. Ford Aviation Investment and Reform Act for the 21st Century (49 U.S.C. 47501 note; 114 Stat. 178) is amended--
(1) in the section heading by striking ``GENERAL ACCOUNTING OFFICE'';
(2) in subsection (a) by striking ``Comptroller General of the United States shall'' and inserting ``Secretary shall enter into an agreement with the National Academy of Sciences to'';
(3) in subsection (b)--
(A) by striking ``Comptroller General'' and inserting
``National Academy of Sciences'';
(B) by striking paragraph (1);
(C) by adding ``and'' at the end of paragraph (4);
(D) by striking ``; and'' at the end of paragraph (5) and inserting a period;
(E) by striking paragraph (6); and
(F) by redesignating paragraphs (2), (3), (4), and (5) as paragraphs (1), (2), (3), and (4), respectively;
(4) by striking subsection (c) and inserting the following:
``(c) Report.--Not later than 18 months after the date of the agreement entered into under subsection (a), the National Academy of Sciences shall transmit to the Secretary a report on the results of the study. Upon receipt of the report, the Secretary shall transmit a copy of the report to the appropriate committees of Congress.''.
``(d) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized to be appropriated such sums as may be necessary to carry out this section.''.
(b) Conforming Amendment.--The table of contents for such Act (114 Stat. 61 et seq.) is amended by striking item relating to section 745 and inserting the following:
``Sec. 745. Airport noise study.''.
SEC. 8. TECHNICAL AMENDMENTS.
(a) Federal Aviation Management Advisory Council.--Section 106(p)(2) is amended by striking ``15'' and inserting ``18''.
(b) National Parks Air Tour Management.--Title VIII of the Wendell H. Ford Aviation Investment and Reform Act for the 21st Century (49 U.S.C. 40128 note; 114 Stat. 185 et seq.) is amended--
(1) in section 803(c) by striking ``40126'' each place it appears and inserting ``40128'';
(2) in section 804(b) by striking ``40126(e)(4)'' and inserting ``40128(f)''; and
(3) in section 806 by striking ``40126'' and inserting
``40128''.
(c) Restatement of Provision Without Substantive Change.--Section 41104(b) of title 49, United States Code, is amended--
(1) by striking paragraph (1) and inserting the following:
``(1) In general.--Except as provided in paragraph (3), an air carrier, including an indirect air carrier, may not provide, in aircraft designed for more than 9 passenger seats, regularly scheduled charter air transportation for which the public is provided in advance a schedule containing the departure location, departure time, and arrival location of the flight unless such air transportation is to and from an airport that has an airport operating certificate issued under part 139 of title 14, Code or Federal Regulations (or any subsequent similar regulation).''; and
(2) by adding at the end the following:
``(3) Exception.--This subsection does not apply to any airport in the State of Alaska or to any airport outside the United States.''.
SEC. 9. EFFECTIVE DATE.
Except as otherwise expressly provided, this Act and the amendments made by this Act shall take effect 30 days after the date of enactment of this Act.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Pease). Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. LaTourette) and the gentleman from Mississippi
(Mr. Shows) each will control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. LaTourette).
Mr. LaTOURETTE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, last March the Subcommittee on Aviation held a hearing on aviation security, and at that time it heard some disturbing testimony.
For example, the General Accounting Office testified that although security screeners have detected about 10,000 guns over the last 5 years, weapons still often pass through airport checkpoints undetected. This is not surprising, given the repetitive, monotonous, stressful job that the screeners have. Moreover, screener pay is very low, only about
$6 or $7 an hour. Some only get minimum wage. Most could probably make more working in a fast food restaurant. As a result, turnover exceeds 100 percent at most large airports; and at one airport, turnover of security screeners topped 400 percent a year.
But it is not turnover that is the problem. For example, the DOT Inspector General told us that even though Congress has authorized about $350 million for the purchase of explosive detection systems, airlines often do not use this equipment as much as they could. The IG also testified that the list of 25 crimes that disqualified one from being a security screener did not include such serious crimes as burglary, bribery, and felony drug possession.
As a result of that hearing, the chairman of the Subcommittee on Aviation, the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Duncan), along with some of my colleagues on the Subcommittee on Aviation, the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Shuster); the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Oberstar); the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Lipinski); and the gentleman from California (Mr. Gary Miller), introduced H.R. 4529. That bill expanded the list of crimes that would disqualify one from being a security screener.
In the Senate, Senator Hutchison of Texas introduced a similar bill. That bill, S. 2440, passed the Senate on October 3. Mr. Speaker, S. 2440 not only expands the list of disqualifying crimes, it also attempts to plug some of the other holes in our aviation security system that hearings have revealed.
Let me emphasize that I believe that our aviation system is safe. There has not been a hijacking of a U.S. airline flight since 1991, and that hijacker did not actually have a weapon as he claimed, so he was arrested. However, as recent events demonstrate, it remains a dangerous world for Americans, and aviation is still a tempting target for terrorists. That is why it is so important to maintain a strong aviation security system, and that is why passage of this bill is so important.
This bill will take several steps to improve aviation security. For one, it will mandate fingerprint checks for all employees who will have access to the airfield or who will be responsible for screening passengers and their baggage. Previously, fingerprint checks were required only where a background investigation revealed gaps in a person's employment history.
To expedite these fingerprint checks, the bill expands the electronic fingerprint transmission project into an aviation industry-wide program. Each airport, airline, and screening company will have the option of deciding whether they want to participate in this new program.
This bill, like the original House bill, also expands the list of crimes that would disqualify a person from working as a screener or getting a job with an airport that would provide access to the airfield.
Another important feature of this bill is the directive to make greater use of explosive detection systems.
Taxpayers have already spent millions on these systems, and we want to make sure that they are fully utilized. FAA and the airlines have been relying on a profiling system to ensure that suspicious bags are examined by an explosive detection system. However, there is no guarantee that this profiling is 100 percent effective.
Increasing the number of bags randomly selected for further examination improves the odds that a 1-in-a-million bag with a bomb will be discovered.
In short, while security in this country is good, it could be better. By upgrading screener training and making other changes that I have described, this bill will make it better, and it will do this at very little cost to the FAA, the airlines, and the airports.
Therefore, I urge passage of this legislation, and I will include a more detailed section-by-section summary of the bill in the Record at this point.
Security Bill--S. 2440
section-by-section summary
Section 1 is the short title.
Section 2 changes the system and requirements governing criminal history record checks (i.e. fingerprint checks).
Subsection (a) expands the electronic fingerprint pilot program.
Paragraph (1) directs FAA to develop the electronic fingerprint transmission pilot project into an aviation industry-wide program within 2 years. This may require airports to purchase new equipment but will expedite the fingerprint checking process.
Paragraph (2) makes clear that small airports do not have to buy the new equipment or participate in the electronic fingerprint transmission program if it would be too costly. They can continue to do the fingerprint checks under the current slower process.
Subsection (b) describes the implementation of the new fingerprint transmission program.
Paragraph (1) directs the FAA to report to Congress within 1 year on the FAA's progress in making this program available throughout the aviation industry.
Paragraph (2) requires the FAA to notify Congress if the fingerprint transmission program will not be operational within 2 years as required by subsection (a)(1).
Subsection (c) requires that fingerprint checks be done for anyone applying for a job as a security screener, a screener supervisor, or that will allow unescorted access to the air field. This requirement takes effect within 30 days at category X airports and within 3 years at all other airports. During the first 3 years, the person can be temporarily employed without the fingerprint check if the fingerprints have been submitted and an employment or background investigation has been done and found no cause for suspicion. This temporary employment without a fingerprint check can last 45 days within 2 years of enactment and 30 days during the third year of enactment. After that, all new employees must have a fingerprint check before beginning work. Applicants who are subject to the fingerprint check do not have to also undergo an employment or background investigation as was formerly the case. Government employees and others with access to the air field, who are exempted under FAA rules from fingerprint checks, will not be subject to them as a result of this bill.
Subsection (d) lists additional crimes that would disqualify a person from being a security screener.
Section 3 calls for improved training.
Subsection (a) adds a new subsection (e) to section 44935 of title 49 establishing new training standards for screeners.
Paragraph (e)(1) requires FAA to issue a final rule for the certification of screening companies by May 31, 2001. This is the rule that was previously mandated by section 302 of public law 104-264, 110 Stat. 3250.
Paragraph (e)(2) requires this rule to prescribe 40 hours of classroom instruction, or an equivalent program, before a person can be a security screener.
Paragraph (e)(3) requires that a person complete 40 hours of on-the-job training and pass an on-the-job exam before exercising independent judgment as a security screener.
Subsection (b) directs FAA to work with airlines and airports to ensure that computer-based training devices for screeners are conveniently located and easily accessible.
Section 4 adds a new subsection (g) to section 44903 of Title 49 to tighten access controls to the airfield.
Paragraph (g)(1) requires FAA to publish a list of sanctions for disciplining employees who violate airport access control requirements. The guidelines shall incorporate a progressive disciplinary approach. Airports, airlines and screening companies shall include the sanctions in their security programs.
Paragraph (g)(2) requires FAA to work with airlines and airports to improve airport access controls by January 31, 2001.
Section 5 calls for better security at air traffic control facilities. This applies only to those facilities that are staffed, not to those that merely house equipment.
Subsection (a) requires FAA to improve security at ATC facilities so that they all can get security accreditation by April 30, 2004.
Subsection (b) requires annual reports from the FAA on the progress being made in getting its facilities accredited, including the percentage that have been accredited.
Section 6 requires FAA to increase the number of checked bags that are selected for screening by explosive detection systems (EDS). The purpose of this requirement is to increase utilization of explosive detection systems at those airport terminals where they are installed. However, the requirement is not intended to require an increase in the number of
``selectees'' when an air carrier instead employs a bag match system--even if the carrier serves an airport in which explosive detection equipment is installed.
Section 7 transfers responsibility for a noise study mandated by section 745 of AIR 21 (P.L. 106-181, 114 Stat. 115) from the General Accounting Office to the National Academy of Sciences.
Section 8 makes several technical changes.
Subsection (a) changes the total number of members of the Management Advisory Council to conform to the number that were added by AIR 21.
Subsection (b) changes incorrect cross references in the National Parks Air Tour Management Act of 2000.
Subsection (c) rewrites section 723 of Air 21 dealing with restrictions on scheduled charters to remove double negatives and make it more understandable.
Section 9 states that the bill becomes effective 30 days after enactment.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. SHOWS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of S. 2440, the Airport Security Improvement Act of 2000. Mr. Speaker, S. 2440 makes several needed changes to the Federal Aviation Administration's airport security program.
In March of this year, the House Subcommittee on Aviation held a hearing on aviation security. During that hearing, both the General Accounting Office and DOT's Inspector General highlighted certain weaknesses in FAA's security program. Significantly, both the GAO and IG uniformly described security screener performance as a ``weak link'' in the aviation system.
Millions of passengers and pieces of baggage pass through our airports each day. Therefore, it is important to maintain passenger screening check points and to ensure that the screeners that operate them are qualified. However, high turnover, low wages, and lack of adequate training hinders security screening performance.
To remedy this situation, S. 2440 directs the FAA to finalize by May 1, 2001, its proposed rule to certify screening companies and enhance screener training. As part of this effort, S. 2440 mandates minimum training standards for screeners: 40 hours of classroom training and 40 hours on the job. Certification of screening companies and mandatory training requirements will help to ensure a proficient and highly qualified screening workforce.
In addition, the IG has found that FAA's background investigative procedures are often ineffective and that vulnerabilities exist in airport access control. To ensure effective background investigations, S. 2440 requires criminal history record checks for those individuals who apply for a position as a screener or as screening supervisor, or who apply for a position that allows for unescorted access to secured areas of an airport. Importantly, S. 2440 adds several crimes to the list of crimes that would disqualify an individual from holding a security-sensitive position.
Mr. Speaker, S. 2440 requires that FAA, in consultation with the Office of Personnel Management and the Federal Bureau of Investigation, to expand its electronic fingerprint transmission pilot project into an aviation industry-wide program. This program will allow for a quick turnaround on criminal background checks for individuals applying for screener or other security-sensitive positions.
To ensure that all potential areas of vulnerability are addressed, S. 2440 directs the FAA to work with responsible parties to eliminate access control weaknesses, requiring airport operators and air carriers to adopt training programs so that all employees are aware of the importance of complying with the access control procedures. Mr. Speaker, S. 2440 also requires airport operators and air carriers to develop programs that award compliance with the access controls procedures, penalize noncompliance, and hold individuals accountable for their actions.
Finally, the GAO testified that although many FAA-certified explosive detection machines have been installed, many of these machines are underutilized. To maximize EDS usage, S. 2440 directs the FAA to require certain air carriers to develop a manual process whereby extra bags would be selected to go through EDS screening.
Congress must continue to oversee FAA's progress in resolving these very significant and complex security issues. I urge my colleagues to support S. 2440.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. LaTOURETTE. Mr. Speaker, the gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Shows) and I have, I think, adequately demonstrated that it is not easy to say ``security screener'' 10 times in a row.
Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of S. 2330, the Airport Security Improvement Act of 2000. S. 2440 makes several needed changes to the Federal Aviation Administration's (FAA) airport security program.
Whenever I consider aviation security, I first reflect on the Pan American World Airways flight 103. On December 21, 1988, the world of aviation security changed forever when a terrorist bomb tore apart a Boeing 737 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 tireless mission to prevent such future tragedies, culminating in the creation of the President's Commission on Aviation Security and Terrorism, on which I served as a commissioner.
The Commission's 1990 report found the nation's civilian aviation security system to be seriously flawed, and made 64 recommendations to correct those flaws. First and foremost among its recommendations was that the FAA aggressively pursue a research and development program to produce new techniques and equipment that will detect small amounts of explosives in an airport operational environment. I introduced legislation implementing the Commission's recommendations. My legislation was enacted in the Aviation Security Improvement Act of 1990. Six years later, spurred by initial concerns that a terrorist act was responsible for the TWA 800 explosion off Long Island, President Clinton organized another commission, the 1996 White House Commission on Aviation Safety and Security. The Gore Commission, as it was known, made 31 recommendations for enhancing aviation security. Again, Congress acted swiftly and, in the 1996 FAA Reauthorization Act, included measures to heighten security.
Since the passage of the 1996 FAA Reauthorization Act, Congress has provided more than $350 million for deployment of security equipment, and more than $250 million in research funds. Recently, the Wendell H. Ford Aviation Investment and Reform Act (AIR 21), which was signed into law by the President on April 5, authorized $5 million annually for the Department of Transportation (DOT) to carry out at least one project to test and evaluate innovation security systems. In addition, AIR 21 authorized such sums as may be necessary to develop and improve security screener training programs and such sums as may be necessary to hire additional inspectors to enhance air cargo security programs.
To date, the FAA has installed 92 FAA-certified explosive detection
(``EDS'') machines at 35 airports, 553 explosive trace detection devices at 84 U.S. and foreign airports, and 18 advanced technology bulk explosives detection x-ray machines at eight airports. In addition, the FAA has deployed 38 computer-based training device platforms at 37 airports. The General Accounting Office (GAO) has commented, however, that at many airports EDS machines are underutilized. S. 2440 directs the FAA to require those air carriers whose EDS machines are underutilized to develop a manual process whereby extra bags would be selected to go through EDS screening.
While deploying EDS equipment is a critical component to increase aviation security, with millions of passengers and pieces of baggage passing through our airports each day, it is also of paramount importance to maintain passenger-screening checkpoints and ensure that the screeners that operate them are well qualified. In March of this year, the House Aviation Subcommittee held a hearing on aviation security. During that hearing, both the GAO and DOT's Inspector General uniformly described security screener performance as the ``weak link'' in the aviation system. The FAA and the airlines share the responsibility to ensure optimal performance of security screeners. However, high turnover, low wages, and lack of adequate training hinder security screener performance.
S. 2440 directs the FAA to finalize by May 1, 2001, its proposed rule that would implement the Gore Commission recommendations to certify screening companies, and enhance screener training. In addition, S. 2440 mandates minimum training standards for screeners: 40 hours of classroom training and 40 hours on the job. Certification of screening companies and mandatory training requirements will go a long way toward ensuring a proficient and highly qualified screening workforce.
In addition, the Inspector General has made some very startling findings regarding the ineffectiveness of FAA's background investigative procedures, and the vulnerabilities in airport access control. An Inspector General study of security procedures at six airports concluded that compliance with existing FAA regulations was lax. Of the 35 percent of employee files reviewed, the IG found no evidence that a complete background investigation had been performed. Despite this failure, airport identification cards were issued to these employees. In addition, 15 percent of the files reviewed showed an unexplained employment gap, but with no requisite criminal background check being performed.
To ensure effective background investigations, S. 2440 requires criminal history record checks for those individuals who apply for a position as a screener or a screener supervisor, or who apply for a position that allows for unescorted access to secured areas of an airport. Importantly, S. 2440 adds several crimes, including illegal possession of a controlled substance, to the list of crimes that would disqualify an individual from holding a security-sensitive position.
Further, S. 2440 requires the FAA, in consultation with the Office of Personnel Management and the Federal Bureau of Investigation, to expand its electronic fingerprint transmission pilot project into an aviation industry wide program. This program will allow for a quick turnaround on criminal background checks for individuals applying for screener or other security-sensitive positions.
The FAA must take a holistic view toward its security responsibilities to ensure that all areas of vulnerability are addressed. However, the airlines and airports also share in that responsibility--and should not put cost considerations above passenger safety. S. 2440 directs the FAA to work with all responsible parties to eliminate access control weaknesses, requiring airport operators and air carriers to adopt training programs so that all employees are aware of the importance of complying with the access control procedures. S. 2440 also requires airport operators and air carriers to develop programs that award compliance with access controls procedures, penalize non-compliance, and hold individuals accountable for their actions.
I made a promise when I was on the President's 1990 Commission on Aviation Security and Terrorism that I would not let that Report gather dust on a shelf. Passage of S. 2440, in combination with the AIR 21 provisions, is just another milestone on the infinite continuum of enhancing aviation security.
We must remain vigilant in our oversight of the FAA's progress in resolving these very significant and complex security issues. We owe it to the American traveling public both here and abroad. I urge my colleagues to support this critical piece of legislation.
Mr. LaTOURETTE. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. LaTourette) that the House suspend the rules and pass the Senate bill, S. 2440, as amended.
The question was taken; and (two-thirds having voted in favor thereof) the rules were suspended and the Senate bill, as amended, was passed.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
____________________
