Explosives Trace

[ground_star]

So then, travelling as SLF BFS->STN at the weekend & the laptop bag clearly upset the ionisation sensors in the X-Ray at BFS.

Follow a full bag search, nothing abnormal there. Being ground staff I obviously have clue where security procedures are concerned.

The (2 weeks employed) security agent goes over everything with a strip from the explosives machine (he didnt tell me this, I just know the machine - GE Itemiser!) & sends over a colleague to take details.

Not once was it communicated to me what was happening & when I asked the colleague just walked away.

From reading what I saw of the form was filled in there was a second trace of explosive on the bag.

Now then, under the Data Protection Act I can claim this back & see exactly what was detected - but I wanted to check with you guys if you know of any exemptions to that?

As ground staff it's rather worrying that a bag which lives 99% of its time in the house & has never been around an explosive in it's life comes to have traces on it.

Obvioulsy I intend to persue ICTS & EGAA for the information because it's not something I take lightly. As yet they have both ignored my requests for information, ICTS so to director level. I wonder if they will do so tomorrow when I ring the ADM at EGAA!? We'll see!

It's also quite worrying that following a 2nd trace I was just allowed to pass with no further ado. Equally worrying is the lack of communication from said security team.

Views, comments, opinions...discuss

GS

[swordfling]

I totally support effective security measures, but far too often they seem to be nothing more than a pointless attempt to reassure the travelling public. :ugh:

In terms of the DPA, there are some exemptions for the purposes of 'safeguarding national security' - not sure if it applies here though. If the exemption applies, I think they should have a certificate to that effect, signed by a 'Minister of the Crown'.

Make a formal request in writing to the data controller (search the register (http://www.esd.informationcommissioner.gov.uk/esd/search.asp)), and if they ignore you they'll probably be in breach of the DPA. They have a maximum of 40 days to respond and you may have to pay a fee (up to £10). The Information Commissioner's Office (http://www.ico.gov.uk/) provides advice, and handles complaints. A copy of the DPA 1998 is available here (http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts1998/19980029.htm).

There's another thread on this topic here (http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?t=267760http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?t=267760).

[noodnik]

Groundstar.
Please keep us informed as to your progress. You've obviously got a vast amount of experience in the Aviation Industry. (especially within Security)
Hope everything works out the way you want and you don't have to post an apology to the Security Company concerned.

[Long Haul]

The same thing has happened to me twice, apparently in my case when my shoes had been in the bag and they had left faint traces of fertilizer from the grass. I would imagine that they are trained not to discuss the procedures for testing with you so that you cannot gain information that could be used to circumvent the system. It would appear to me that the system worked in this case in the way it was supposed to, in that you weren't carrying explosives and were allowed to go through.. Can't you just forget about it?

[SXB]

GS
As for the DP act it depends on how the information is stored. The DP act only covers information stored on computers, it would also depend on if your name is actually linked to the stored data, which is probably not the case.

I don't know how those machines work but if they pick up chemical compositions and components used in explosives devices you'll find some of those are quite common and not soley used for blowing things up.

I sometimes have a little sympathy for the people working on the security lanes, there is a lot written about them being clueless idiots, which certainly isn't the case. As an example of a clueless idiot take my colleague who travelled with me to Sarajevo a couple of weeks ago. On the way to the airport for our return leg he announced that he had purchased a spent tank shell from a bloke on the market and was taking it back to Strasbourg, as a momento, in his hand luggage. A quick examination of the said ordnance did reveal it was some kind of tank projectile and it didn't look particularly spent to me. Anyway, spent or not a tank shell is not the kind of thing you take into an airport or onto an aircraft.

In the end our driver delivered the shell to the authorities for proper disposal, it did turn out that it was spent and completely harmless but you can just imagine the reaction it would provoke from airport security....

[Pax Vobiscum]

The DP act only covers information stored on computers
<ANORAK MODE>
Since the 1998 revision, the Data Protection Act also covers "relevant filing systems", defined as:
any set of information relating to individuals to the extent that, although the information is not processed by means of equipment operating automatically in response to instructions given for that purpose, the set is structured, either by reference to individuals or by reference to criteria relating to individuals, in such a way that specific information relating to a particular individual is readily accessible.
Or, in plainer language, stuff kept in filing cabinets. More info (in the very unlikely event that anyone wants it) here (http://www.opsi.gov.uk/ACTS/acts1998/19980029.htm)
</ANORAK MODE>

Sorry about that, carry on gentlemen (and ladies too, of course) ...

[SXB]

PV
I stand corrected.