Aug. 10, 2006 – Updated 4:18 p.m.
The targeted inspection of liquids and gels in carry-on luggage highlights a major lapse in aviation security and one that is difficult to solve, according to analysts. While the threat of explosive liquids and gels has been known for more than 10 years, technology being developed is still years away from implementation.
Airport screeners cannot determine whether liquids in luggage are benign, or when mixed with other agents could be used in an explosive device.
After the plot to attack flights from London to the United States was foiled overnight Thursday, the Transportation Security Administration instituted a new regulation banning all liquid and gels from carry-on baggage. Only baby formula and medications were exempted.
“The terrorists planned to carry the components of the bombs, including liquid explosive ingredients and detonating devices, disguised as beverages, electronic devices or other common objects,” said Homeland Security Secretary
Government officials have been aware of the threat liquid explosives pose, a former DHS official said, but they concentrated efforts on preventing all components of an improvised explosive device (IED) from being carried on a plane. Much of the focus was on detonators, leading TSA to ban lighters and matches, as well as to closely inspect laptop computers, which contain powerful batteries.
“The priority would be to assure that any explosive device could not be detonated,” the former official, who spoke on condition of anonymity said.
Under the new guidelines, all liquid and gels would be placed in checked bags. Baby formulas and medications will be presented for inspection at the security checkpoint.
Liquid devices are less of a concern in checked baggage because those bags go through an explosive detection system, rather than an X-ray machine, and because human contact is likely needed to mix components of the improvised explosive device.
“X-rays will show you metal, but they won’t show you biological material,” said one congressional aide.
While TSA had been focused on preventing one person from bringing all components onboard, it did not focus attention on several passengers each bringing separate pieces who would then meet onboard, the aide said. That was the alleged plan for attacking the commercial aircraft.
“They have been focused on IED detection in one’s own stuff,” the aide said. “In the air, they were going to come together.”
Chertoff said DHS is preventing most liquids in carry-on luggage to give the government time to make adjustments in screening tactics.
“I would say certainly one of the considerations or one of the concerns we had is the possibility of bringing on board a number of different components of a bomb, each one of which would be benign, but when mixed together would create a bomb,” Chertoff said. “And as we assess exactly what the design of these devices was, or the planned design was, I think it will give us a better ability to tailor our countermeasures in order to pick up what appears to be a quite sophisticated conception of how to execute a terrorist bombing plot.”
But this type of attack has been seen before. Ramzi Yousef, who was convicted for plotting the first World Trade Center attack in 1993, assembled a bomb in a Philippine Airlines plane in 1994, using liquid nitroglycerine he placed in a contact lens solution bottle. He was allegedly testing the device, which killed one person, before using it more widely on American planes.
Mike Brooks, a former member of the FBI Terrorism Task Force, said intelligence officials have looked at liquid explosives before, but that it has not come up in recent threats.
“They’ve been working on technology for this for quite some time,” Brooks said. “But it’s extremely hard to detect.”
Experts said there are some processes being evaluated that would allow screeners to identify the chemical components of all materials, liquid and solid, in one’s luggage.
Eventually, passengers would be required to take out all liquid products and have them tested, to ensure they do not contain explosive compounds.
But full implementation of that technology is years away.
“Right now, it’s very impractical because we have not invested enough money to put it in every airport,” said Charles Slepian, CEO of the Foreseeable Risk Analysis Center.
Guardian Technologies has developed the PinPoint Threat Identification Software, which uses computer software to analyze solids and liquids in x-ray scans of baggage, based on imaging filters and algorithms.
While it has not been tested on liquid explosives, it will be laboratory tested by DHS in the coming months after successful trials at international airports, according to Steve Lancaster, Guardian’s vice president.
Trace explosive detection technology, in which the chemical properties of materials on a passenger’s personal property and clothes is collected and instantly analyzed, is seen in limited use at major American airports as well.
Another approach would be to test objects that are handled by a passenger, like boarding passes, for residues.
A Congressional Research Service report, released a day before the plot became public, said 93 detection portals have been deployed in 36 airports since 2004, as well as limited document scanners. The portal systems cost more than $160,000 each.
The report stressed that problems remain with any system that would test for explosive residue on passengers, including longer security lines and false positive results.
But experts said that in most cases these new technologies would only pick up residue of known explosives. Liquid explosives and items that would be explosive when mixed would not be identified.
Congress has consistently increased funding for the Explosives Countermeasures Portfolio, to find avenues to detect and prevent an explosive attack. Detecting liquid explosives is part of that program, aides said.
The program received $18.9 million in fiscal 2005 and was raised to $43.5 million last year. The House version of the Homeland Security appropriations for fiscal 2007 calls for the program to receive $76.6 million.
The Senate Appropriations Committee report for fiscal 2007 Homeland Security funding includes more than $32 million for coordinating a national bombing prevention effort. DHS’s Office of Bombing Prevention is working on a national strategy to prevent bombing attacks, a congressional aide said.
Rep. Bennie G. Thompson, D-Miss., ranking Democrat of the House Homeland Security Committee, said Thursday the Bush administration needed to “move expeditiously to develop and install next generation explosive detection technologies with the ability to detect lethal materials like those involved in the British plot.”
Matthew E. Berger can be reached at mberger@cq.com.
First posted Aug. 10, 2006 1:36 p.m.
|
Related Stories
|