Airport parking lots may reopen - Closures prompted by 9-11 attacks (concerns about car bombs)

WASHINGTON - Beginning Monday, the government will open parking lots at the country's biggest airports that have been off-limits since Sept. 11, 2001, because of worries about car bombs.

Federal officials also will change the way air travelers are screened after they pass security checkpoints over the next few weeks, checking them only at randomly selected gates, Transportation Security Administration spokesman Robert Johnson said.

"We're trying to avoid screening grandma two or three times as she makes her way home for the holidays," Mr. Johnson said.

Mr. Johnson said the prohibition on unattended vehicles parking within 300 feet of a terminal would be dropped Monday as long as the terrorist threat level is at code yellow, or "elevated," the middle of a five-point scale of risk developed after the terror attacks.

TSA chief James Loy was scheduled to announce the change at an airport security conference co-sponsored by the Airports Council International-North America and the American Association of Airport Executives.

The so-called 300-foot rule will be reimposed if the threat level rises, Mr. Johnson said.

Airports would have to outline how they would deal with the threat of an explosion. They won't have to close the parking areas during an elevated threat if their plans don't call for that, he said.

New layers of airport security allow the rules to be eased, he said, listing better-trained screeners, federal air marshals, background checks of people who work beyond airport security checkpoints and screening of checked baggage at 252 airports.

D/FW International Airport officials said they weren't notified of the change although they have been lobbying the TSA to relax the rule eliminating parking within 300 feet of a terminal. The 2,900 close-in parking spaces that would be affected are on top of the terminal parking garages.

D/FW Airport spokesman Ken Capps said that even if the change is made, travelers won't have access to the spaces immediately.

As part of a plan to improve parking security, airport officials said they also want to eliminate mandatory patrols of the parking garages and instead conduct security screenings at the traffic gates that already stop motorists. Airport executives said that with those security measures, the ban on the closest short-term parking spaces wouldn't be needed.

The required patrols cost about $1 million annually. About $9 million is lost by roping off those 2,900 parking spaces, which would cost travelers $16 per day.

Todd Hauptli, an airport lobbyist, said the airports have pushed the TSA hard to let them reopen close-in parking lots because the rule has brought no significant improvement in security.

Mr. Johnson said the boarding pass procedures would be changed at Milwaukee's Gen. Mitchell International Airport, Cincinnati/Northern Kentucky International Airport, Houston's Bush Intercontinental Airport, Boston's Logan International Airport, Memphis International Airport in Tennessee, Charlotte/Douglas International Airport in North Carolina, Seattle-Tacoma International Airport and Pittsburgh International.

The places where some or all passengers must get boarding passes before going through security checkpoints are Los Angeles; Long Beach, Calif.; Newark, N.J.; Detroit; Minneapolis/St. Paul; Miami; St. Louis; and LaGuardia and Kennedy in New York.

I could never understand the 300' thing when you can drive up to the drop off point and sit in your car for a couple of minutes. You're much closer to the action than in a parking garage. Plus most terrorists aren't concerned about getting caught or blowing themselves up, heck that's a bonus to them if it does happen.
One thing I do like about the new regulations is only letting ticketed passengers through to the gates. Makes for much less hectic traveling.
Next I hope they get rid of marking tickets with a star (*) if you're to get shoe-searched. Looking at my ticket once I wondered what the star was. Then I had to take off my shoes. Talking with a friend they also had the star and the shoe treatment. How long till Akmed figures this out?

they are backing off some of the insanity just a little too late. The message is already out there: Customers are an inconvenience. So the customers left.

This amounts to about 1/20th of what is needed to restore customer satisfaction with air travel.

>>One thing I do like about the new regulations is only letting ticketed passengers through to the gates.

My only complaint with that is that I can't go meet my mother at the gate, and there's no room for exceptions in the system. She gets around more than fine on her own, but navigating a big airport like Atlanta is non-trivial for someone who doesn't travel much.

Long term, this stuff is killing air travel, and is a large part of the reason United is declaring backruptcy (along with the union idiocy). And air travel is an important part of the U.S. economy.

One thing I do like about the new regulations is only letting ticketed passengers through to the gates.

And, just what does that do for security? Everyone STILL has to go through the security checkpoint. If Abdul can get it through security, he'll board the airplane to go meet Allah and the virgins.

Here in Pittsburgh, the new airport had Airside shopping, some stores that were only at the Airport, such as the PGA Shop. We used to go shopping there. Not anymore.

My parents fly infrequently. Both are in the 70s and my Father doesn't get around real well. They would like to have us with them until they board and when they come back. We WANT to be there, also. With our hectic shedules, it's comforting time to sit and talk. Not anymore.

Sheer lunacy. All in the name of security. I've had arguments with senior family members (the others, AKA as the outlaws) who say "It's no big deal" "If you're not doing anything wrong, you have should have no fear", etc. To which I think -- "Your papers, please."

Exactly. The fundamental problem is that we are attempting to create air travel security purely by rules and random inspection, rather than the system that works for what is arguably the most secure airline on the planet - El Al.

That system, in a nutshell? They *profile*.

I agree that it is nonsense allowing only ticketed passengers through to the "secure" areas of the airport. This creates inconvenience for families with traveling elderly / children, as well as for businessmen.

I have conducted meetings at the airport several times when I was not traveling. The person that I was meeting was just coming through and could spare a few hours, etc. Now, you cannot do this.

A minor inconvenience? Yes. But the point is that, just like many of the "security" regulations that are being "relaxed" now, it serves no purpose -- symbolism over substance.

Not having a ticket is not going to stop a terrorist. They will simply purchase one.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.