Computer screening of passengers behind schedule
From Mike M. Ahlers
CNN
 |
Story Tools
|
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The Department of Homeland Security conceded Thursday that its plan to conduct computerized screening of airline passengers is behind schedule, but said it is still committed to the controversial security program.
In meetings with reporters and in testimony on Capitol Hill, department officials sought to stem the damage of a just-released General Accounting Office report. That report concludes the department is behind schedule and has failed to completely address seven of the eight congressional concerns about the program.
"We acknowledge and agree with much of what is in the report from GAO," assistant administrator for the Transportation Security Administration Tom Blank told House members. "I would say, however, that what we are encouraged about is the fact that we are taking our time to get this right."
"The message, I think, is we have not slowed down our level of efforts to [begin] testing," Homeland Security Undersecretary Asa Hutchinson told reporters.
Although Hutchinson had previously said testing of the CAPPS II system -- short for the Computer-Assisted Passenger Prescreening System -- would begin this spring, he declined Thursday to predict its start date.
"I think we should just take it a step at a time," he said.
The administration is touting CAPPS II as a way to verify the identity of airline passengers and to keep known terrorists and those known to affiliate with terrorists off passenger planes.
CAPPS II is to replace the present CAPPS system, which flags passengers for secondary screening based on certain factors -- such as whether a passenger paid cash for his ticket, or purchased a one-way ticket. Homeland Security officials acknowledge that system is ineffective at stopping terrorists.
Under CAPPS II, airlines will provide the TSA with passengers' names, home addresses, phone numbers and birth dates. That information is compared to commercial databases to verify the passengers' identities, and then matched against government databases of terrorists.
But privacy advocates have condemned airlines who have turned over passenger information to the TSA, prompting the airlines to say they will not voluntarily give information to the government. That, in turn, has hampered the TSA's ability to conduct tests of the system.
The TSA is expected to order airlines to provide passenger information in the next month or two.
Privacy advocates Thursday said that given that 100 million people fly each week, the system is unworkable and should be scuttled.
"This is a system that builds a huge haystack and expects it is going to be able to find the needle in it," said Barry Steinhard of the American Civil Liberties Union.
The department's chief privacy officer said she, too, has many concerns about CAPPS II, but believes they can be addressed.
"The GAO is right. There are lots of questions that are unanswered," said Nuala O'Connor Kelly. "That does not mean they are unanswerable."
Kelly said she is concerned about the system's effectiveness at screening foreign passengers, for whom no data may exist in U.S. databases. She also is concerned about disparate impacts on certain segments of society, such as people who have recently moved.
Hutchinson told reporters he will create an "external review board" to make sure CAPPS II does not violate passenger privacy. He said the board would include interested parties.
On Capitol Hill, Rep. John Mica, R-Florida, said he was disturbed at the lack of progress in CAPPS II.
Rep. Peter DeFazio, D-Oregon, said he was worried about passengers whom CAPPS II wrongly identifies as terrorists.
"I mean it's going to be worse than dealing with the credit card companies when they screw up your credit card records, as far as I can tell," he said.
"In this case I'm being told you won't even be given the information that was supposedly found about you, [information] that is supposedly denying you service," DeFazio added.
Blank said the TSA is working on a redress system that will allow passengers who are wrongly singled out to have their cases reviewed.
