Homeland Security

Testimony of Angela Gittens, Aviation Director, Miami-Dade Aviation Department
Before the U.S. House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure

Subcommittee on Aviation
Aviation Security: Progress And Problems In Passenger And Baggage Screening

February 12, 2004

10:00 a.m., 2167 Rayburn House Office Building

Good morning Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee.  I thank you for your invitation to discuss the progress and problems in passenger and baggage screening at Miami International Airport.

First, I would like to ask permission to submit to you additional information for the sealed record containing some security sensitive information that I will not address in this public forum.

Secondly, I know I speak for all of the airport directors here when I emphasize that airport proprietors have a maximum stake in the safety and security of air transportation.  We know it is the cornerstone of our business since commercial aviation cannot exist as a form of mass transportation without that safety and security.  The dramatic adverse effect of the steep decline in air travel after September 11^th was tragic proof of that fact. So this will not be a debate on the vital interests we share to constantly rachet up the level of safety and security in our national air transportation system. 

Although I will be talking about some of our frustrations in dealing with the Transportation Security Administration, I would like to acknowledge up front that we have a great deal of respect for the tremendous challenge it confronts and the progress the TSA has made in its short tenure.  We have worked very collaboratively and cooperatively with the MIA Federal Security Director and his staff as teammembers in an integrated mission and will continue to do so.  We commend them for the job they do.

My purpose today is to highlight the barriers that are keeping the TSA as an institution from being responsive to the security needs of Miami International Airport. We are concerned that the federal government is retreating from the commitments it made to the communities of this nation in the wake of the vicious attacks of September 11^th 2001.

The most pressing issue for my community I would like to discuss concerns the Explosive Detection System - or EDS ─ installation at MIA.  Congress imposed a December 31^st, 2002 deadline for permanent installation of EDS equipment in-line with the baggage sortation systems.  To accomplish this on an interim basis at MIA, the TSA installed EDS equipment in the passenger lobbies and baggage make-up areas.  It was clear to all that our mostly 60's vintage terminal facilities could not long tolerate such an arrangement but one makes do in the short term.

At MIA, we are  in the midst of a $4.8 billion Capital Improvement Program - CIP - that includes the construction of two new terminals, North and South, along with improvements to the existing Central Terminal.  Our construction program has entered its peak phase with expenditures of over $1 million per day - $40 million per month. 

Faced with reduced passenger traffic since September 11^th and the need to maintain our Cost per Enplaned passenger at a level that remains competitive and minimizes the risk of a further loss of traffic, we are now forced to eliminate key elements of our construction program, such as runway safety projects, and defer other projects with strong community support, including the intermodal commuter facility that is a part of Miami-Dade County's overall transportation plan.  

These project cancellations and deferrals are primarily driven because the airport now must fund the permanent installation of EDS equipment in-line since, we are advised, the TSA has reneged on its commitment.  For Miami-Dade County this constitutes a $236 million unfunded federal mandate that we can ill afford, but can no longer defer given our ongoing construction.  The longer we wait the bigger the ultimate bill since, as we know, in construction, time is money.

We have been working with TSA on two mutually agreeable Memorandums of Agreement and Letters of Intent -MOA/LOIs -to define the funding amounts and schedules for performance of work for the EDS in-line installation in our existing Central Terminal and the North and South Terminal Development Programs.  In fact, it was during a conference call the day after Thanksgiving, 2002, when then-TSA Administrator Admiral Loy proposed to us the MOA/LOI process.  Airports had expressed themselves willing to finance the substantial EDS installation cost by allowing the TSA to leverage its resources by spreading out payments over several years.  In this way, the TSA could achieve its mandate at more airports in a shorter period of time. 

We agreed with Admiral Loy that a Letter-Of-Intent program, modeled after FAA's successful AIP-LOI program, subject to annual Congressional appropriations, would be an effective way to accomplish the work and reimburse airports.

Over a year has passed since our conversation with Admiral Loy and a second congressional deadline for permanent installation of EDS has come and gone, yet MIA still does not have formal approval of EDS in-line designs and a funding commitment from TSA.    We understand TSA has prioritized their LOIs into phases with eight airports programmed for LOIs in Phase I.   We understand that TSA has signed LOIs with six of the Phase I airports and will be signing two additional LOIs in the very near future. 

Due to no fault of our own, MIA was not placed in this first group of airports even though we are the nation's third busiest international gateway and have the highest number of foreign visitors of any airport in the nation.  We have been a Category X airport since such categorization began nearly twenty years ago.

We now hear that the Office of Management and Budget has prohibited TSA from entering into any further LOI agreements for EDS installation due to the lack of a dedicated funding stream, such as what the airway trust fund is to the AIP.  So, even though Congress has passed appropriations for the TSA to install EDS equipment, although we can contemplate that Congress will pass appropriations in the future; although the threat and the need remain, the LOI program is effectively suspended.  And with the suspension of a program that was a convenience to the TSA and a way for the TSA to hasten achievement of its mandate, the TSA now walks away from its mandate.

You will forgive me if I say we feel that the Miami-Dade County community has been dumped on.  Along with other members of the community, I have personally traveled to Washington on numerous occasions over the last two years to make sure that TSA knew how important the LOI/MOA request is to MIA. I have met with every TSA Administrator and many senior executives.  I was always  assured that our message was received, but received no commitment; on other occasions our audience would express surprise that we had not already gotten our LOI/MOA, given the importance of our airport, and assured due attention would be given to our request.

 After all the TSA leadership changes and meetings and conversations, I am sorry to report to you that MIA is no closer to receiving funding for EDS installation than we were when TSA was created in November, 2001 with the signing of the Aviation and Transportation Security Act.

We - the airports, airlines, federal and local agencies -  are all responsible for the safety, security and facilitation of operating air service at the nation's airports.  The Florida Members here know how important MIA is to the economic viability of South Florida and, indeed, the entire State.  In addition to extensive security initiatives of our own, we have responded to the many security directives and mandates instituted by federal agencies, but it is these critical unfunded mandates such as EDS, that will strangle MIA and adversely impact the associated $9.5 billion in economic impact and more than 75,000 direct and indirect jobs that MIA brings to the State of Florida[AG1] .

Some recommendations. 

With respect to the permanent EDS in-line installation, Congress must act now to clarify TSA's ability to obligate funds for airports at which TSA has determined that an in-line solution is the only effective means of accomplishing the intent of the Aviation and Transportation Security Act.  There appears to be a debate within the Executive Branch as to the fiscal or statutory or policy basis for the LOI/MOA program.  Congress should address this and provide a viable means to reimburse airports for this unfunded mandate.  If a dedicated source of funding IS needed for a an LOI program, then Congress should provide it.  If the answer is just additional funding, then we urge Congress to include an earmark for terminal modifications for in-line EDS in the supplemental spending bill. 

Also, I want to urge you to maintain the 90% federal share for all airports.  The Administration has proposed in its 2005 Budget Request that at large and medium airports EDS projects should be funded at 75%.  We strongly oppose this proposal.  It is an appalling betrayal of our community that the federal government commits to taking on a responsibility, then asks for a 10% local match for the federal government's responsibility, then asks for a 25% match, if not a 100% match - as though baggage screening has become a local responsibility.

Lastly, I think we need a cold hard look at what it's going to take to protect our nation's air transportation system without undoing the air transportation system's main job: to serve as the economic engines of community economies.  With two years into the mission, it's not too early to look back at ATSA, with the TSA, the Department of Homeland Security, the local communities and the industry, and start making such adjustments as may be necessary to secure, not just a place or a plane, but the process of air travel. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank you for holding this hearing and for your leadership in this critical issue.  I would be pleased to answer your questions at the appropriate time.