According to passenger rail operators, the openness of passenger rail  systems can leave them vulnerable to terrorist attack. Multiple Stakeholders Share Responsibility for Securing Passenger Rail Systems

Securing the nation’s passenger rail systems is a shared responsibility  requiring coordinated action on the part of federal, state, and local  governments; the private sector; and passengers who ride these systems. A Variety of Explosives Detection Technologies Are Available or in Development That Could Help Secure Passenger Rail Systems—If Tailored to the Needs of Individual Rail Systems—but Limitations Exist

Several different types of explosives detection technologies could be  applied to help secure passenger rail, although operational constraints of  rail exist that would be important considerations. Advanced Imaging Technology (AIT) portals  are becoming available but, as with trace portals, will likely have only  limited applicability in passenger rail. These systems, while they may be used to  detect explosive material, are also often used to detect other parts of a  bomb. Detection performance varies across the different  technologies with more established technologies such as handheld,  desktop, kit-based trace detection systems, x-ray imaging systems, and  canines having demonstrated good performance against many  conventional explosives threats while newer technologies such as ETPs,  AIT, and standoff detection systems are in various stages of maturity. Important characteristics of the technologies such as screening  throughput, mobility, and durability, as well as physical space constraints  in rail stations may limit deployment options for explosives detection  technologies in passenger rail. Several Overarching Operational and Policy Factors Could Impact the Role of Explosives Detection Technologies in the Passenger Rail Environment

In addition to how well technologies work in detecting explosives and  their applicability in the passenger rail environment, there are several  overarching operational and policy considerations impacting the role that  these technologies can play in securing the passenger rail environment,  such as who is paying for them and what to do when they apparently  detect explosives. Specifically, 1) the roles and  responsibilities of multiple federal and local stakeholders could impact  how explosives detection technologies are funded and implemented in  passenger rail; 2) implementation of technology or any security investment  could be undertaken in accordance with risk management principles, to  ensure limited security funding is allocated to those areas at greatest risk;  3) explosives detection technologies are one component of a layered  approach to security, where multiple security measures combine to form  the overall security environment; 4) a well-defined and designed concept  of operations for the use of these technologies is important to ensure that  they work effectively in the rail environment; and 5) cost and potential  legal implications are important policy considerations when determining  whether and how to use these technologies. The Roles and Responsibilities of Multiple Federal and Local Stakeholders Could Impact How Explosives Detection Technologies are Funded and Implemented in Passenger Rail

Although there is a shared responsibility for securing the passenger rail  environment, the federal government and rail operators have differing  roles, which could complicate decisions to fund and implement  technologies. Additionally, Amtrak officials stated that they conducted  a risk assessment of all of their systems. A Concept of Operations For Explosives Detection Technologies Could Enable Passenger Rail Operators to Better Balance Security with the Movement of Passengers

In deploying explosives detection technologies, it is important to develop a  concept of operations (CONOPS) for both using these technologies to  screen passengers and their belongings and for responding to identified  threats. DHS’s TSA and the Department of Transportation provided  technical comments which we have incorporated as appropriate. Appendix I: Scope and Methodology

To determine what explosives detection technologies are available and  their ability to help secure the passenger rail environment, we met with  experts and officials on explosives detection research, development, and  testing, and reviewed test, evaluation, and pilot reports and other  documentation from several components within the Department of  Homeland Security including the Science and Technology Directorate, the  Transportation Security Laboratory; the Transportation Security  Administration (TSA); the Office of Bombing Prevention; and the United  States Secret Service; several Department of Defense (DOD) components  including the Naval Explosive Ordnance Disposal Technology Division  (NAVEODTECHDIV), the Technical Support Working Group (TSWG), and  the Joint Improvised Explosive Device Defeat Organization (JIEDDO);  several Department of Energy (DOE) National Laboratories involved in  explosives detection testing, research and development including Los  Alamos National Laboratory (LANL), Sandia National Laboratories (SNL),  Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL), and Idaho National Laboratory  (INL); and the Department of Justice (DOJ) including the Bureau of  Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF), because of its  expertise in explosives detection.
Why GAO Did This Study

Passenger rail systems are vital to the nation's transportation infrastructure, providing approximately 14 million passenger trips each weekday. Recent terrorist attacks on these systems around the world--such as in Moscow, Russia in 2010--highlight the vulnerability of these systems. The Department of Homeland Security's (DHS) Transportation Security Administration (TSA) is the primary federal entity responsible for securing passenger rail systems. In response to the Legislative Branch Appropriations Act for fiscal year 2008, GAO conducted a technology assessment that reviews 1) the availability of explosives detection technologies and their ability to help secure the passenger rail environment, and 2) key operational and policy factors that impact the role of explosives detection technologies in the passenger rail environment. GAO analyzed test reports on various explosives detection technologies and convened a panel of experts comprised of a broad mix of federal, technology, and passenger rail industry officials. GAO also interviewed officials from DHS and the Departments of Defense, Energy, Transportation, and Justice to discuss the effectiveness of these technologies and their applicability to passenger rail. GAO provided a draft of this report these departments for comment. Four departments provided technical comments, which we incorporated as appropriate.

What GAO Found

A variety of explosives detection technologies are available or in development that could help secure passenger rail systems. While these technologies show promise in certain environments, their potential limitations in the rail environment need to be considered and their use tailored to individual rail systems. The established technologies, such as handheld, desktop, and kitbased trace detection systems, and x-ray imaging systems, as well as canines, have demonstrated good detection capability with many conventional explosive threats and some are in use in passenger rail today. Newer technologies, such as explosive trace portals, advanced imaging technology, and standoff detection systems, while available, are in various stages of maturity and more operational experience would be required to determine their likely performance if deployed in passenger rail. When deploying any of these technologies to secure passenger rail, it is important to take into account the inherent limitations of the underlying technologies as well as other considerations such as screening throughput, mobility, and durability, and physical space limitations in stations.

What GAO Recommends

GAO is not making recommendations, but is raising various policy considerations. For example, in addition to how well technologies detect explosives, GAO's work, in consultation with rail and technology experts, identified several key operational and policy considerations impacting the role that these technologies can play in securing the passenger rail environment. Specifically, while there is a shared responsibility for securing the passenger rail environment, the federal government, including TSA, and passenger rail operators have differing roles, which could complicate decisions to fund and implement explosives detection technologies. For example, TSA provides guidance and some funding for passenger rail security, but rail operators themselves provide day-to-day-security of their systems. In addition, risk management principles could be used to guide decision-making related to technology and other security measures and target limited resources to those areas at greatest risk. Moreover, securing passenger rail involves multiple security measures, with explosives detection technologies just one of several components that policymakers can consider as part of the overall security environment. Furthermore, developing a concept of operations for using these technologies and responding to threats that they may identify would help balance security with the need to maintain the efficient and free flowing movement of people. A concept of operations could include a response plan for how rail employees should react to an alarm when a particular technology detects an explosive. Lastly, in determining whether and how to implement these technologies, federal agencies and rail operators will likely be confronted with challenges related to the costs and potential privacy and legal implications of using explosives detection technologies.