APTA | Passenger Transport
July 5, 2010

In This Issue


The 14 help wanted ads in this week's classifieds offer such jobs as a transit agency general manager and an executive director in academia!


Keeping an Eye on Transit Security

Editor's Note: Today's commentary page offers a recent posting from the securityinfowatch.com web site focusing on safety and security in public transportation. (The site concentrates on public safety issues and municipal security.) Also, read about how NIST works with DHS to create blast-resistance standards.

This column originally appeared on SecurityInfoWatch.com and is ©2010 SecurityInfoWatch.com.

The security week that was: 06/11/10
BY GEOFF KOHL, Editor-in-Chief, SecurityInfoWatch.com

The Risk of Abandoned Bags
There is a new report out from the FBI warning law enforcement agencies about a new terrorist approach. According to the report, terrorists will often leave suspicious bags and packages in public locations, but the packages and bags are actually harmless, filled with innocuous materials.

The FBI report had the following to say: “The stated goal of the campaign was to exploit desensitization of first responders caused by response fatigue to suspicious, but harmless items. The poster suggested packing bags with innocuous items and placing them in public areas has the capability to occupy response assets and disrupt public infrastructure and transportation.”

So, what should first responders do? Should they be ignoring bags unless there is real reason to believe the bag or package is a threat? Or should they respond to every suspicious, unattended bag or package as if it is a real bomb?

It’s a tough question. On the one hand, if Islamic terrorists do actively leave lots of suspicious, unattended bags in train stations, in popular shopping areas, on buses, etc., this clearly could tax first responder resources heavily. And that means two things: 1) it means a great expense, since rolling out a bomb squad takes time and costs money, and 2) as the article and report indicates, it could desensitize our responders into potentially ignoring real bombs.

Long before this FBI report surfaced, I asked former Maryland Transit Administration Chief of Police Douglas Deleaver the same question. I asked him whether he would respond to every abandoned bag as if it were a bomb. He emphatically said, “Yes.” Doug recognized that this kind of tactic can have two purposes for the terrorists. The first is desensitization. The second, he said, is that potential terrorists might use this tactic to study how first responders actually respond. The danger in not responding is that terrorists would be assured that dropping a real bomb in a crowded area is unlikely to obtain a response. If they knew they wouldn’t receive a law enforcement response, the terrorists would be emboldened to use abandoned bags as real bombs. Doug’s point was that law enforcement personnel, especially those in common “soft targets” like buses, train stations, and crowded areas, have to ignore the costs, be vigilant against desensitization and respond to every potential incident as if it were real.

Chief Deleaver spoke on this topic and other aspects of mass transit security in a now-archived webinar titled “Securing Public Transportation Systems.” I encourage you to view the archived program, which also featured presentations from Mass Transit Magazine’s Editor Fred Jandt, ADT (integrating security for public transit systems) and Hirsch Electronics (access control for public transit facilities).

A technology response is also appropriate here if the FBI is right that Islamic terrorists are going to use harmless bags to burden our responders. Two recent improvements in video surveillance systems have been 1) faster access to video surveillance data and 2) automated identification of events.

On the automatic identification side, there are scores of companies in the video analytics field that have workable solutions for “object left behind” incidents. These analytics companies have been showing their wares at the tradeshows for years and the systems are reportedly improving in their efficiency. Adoption of this technology has been slow (cost, false positives, and time required for a high-quality installation have been the initial factors that have slowed adoption), but if we see a strong influx of suspicious bags and packages, these analytics technologies could really explode.

Beyond analytics, newer video management systems and plug-ins like the BriefCam video synopsis system, means video surveillance users can access archived video faster than ever. Centralized VMS systems means security officers and police officers don’t have to run all around the buildings to access DVR monitors and VCRs, but can quickly scan through an entire facility’s video data in one location. Responders who find a potential package bomb in a train station can theoretically find the video within minutes and use the video to attempt to ascertain whether they were dealing with a forgetful passenger or a would-be terrorist. Finally, the overall increase in user of cameras in soft-target environments means better follow-up, so that police can track down those persons using would-be package bombs to tax our law enforcement response abilities.
 In any case, the picture this FBI report paints is not a pretty one. There is no easy answer or way to stop such attempts (unless we make forgetfulness a crime), and the man-hours to respond to an increase in would-be bombs is not going to be cheap. But as Chief Deleaver noted, it’s something we have to do if we are going to keep our nation secure.

This item originally appeared on the web site of the National Institute of Standards and Technology. Read more here.

NIST Works with DHS to Create Blast-Resistance Standards
With summer travel season hard upon us, specialists at the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) have helped create two new standards designed to increase safety as we rush from gate to gate in crowded mass transit centers. Their efforts will help to fortify against potential bomb threats in the nation’s transportation centers.

Whether you travel by plane, train or bus, you’re bound to pass a familiar container that makes for an attractive spot to stash a bomb: a trash can. Not only does a trash receptacle present an easy place for a terrorist to hide an explosive device before making a quiet getaway, but the metal from a bin can rupture into shrapnel that flies outward in all directions, increasing the risk to passersby.

While industry has been producing blast-resistant trash receptacles for years, there were no widely-accepted specifications for judging a manufacturer’s particular claims of product safety. The Science and Technology Directorate of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and several manufacturers began working with NIST in 2007 to address the lack of standards for blast resistance among trash receptacles.

The two standards will allow managers of transit centers—and other venues as well—to know exactly how a given receptacle model has been tested against blasts and precisely what a passing grade means in terms of resistance. A trash receptacle has met the standard if it is capable of directing a blast upward, rather than outward, at a given level of force. 

« Previous Article Return to Top | Return to Main Next Article »

© Copyright © 2008 American Public Transportation Association 1666 K Street NW, Washington, DC 20006
Telephone (202) 496-4800 • Fax (202) 496-4321

Search Back Issues