Rail Security: Protecting U.S. Transportation Infrastructure
This paper analyzes rail security in the United States following the September 11 terrorist attacks, exploring how increased demand for rail transportation has made the industry a potential target for terrorist activity. The paper examines the historical shift from law enforcement concerns (robbery and pilferage) to modern homeland security threats, evaluates current security measures at rail yards, commuter stations, and long-haul passenger trains, and assesses cargo security protocols for hazardous materials. It argues that while federal agencies have implemented voluntary security action items, a comprehensive rail security strategy comparable to aviation security is needed to protect vulnerable access points, densely populated transit corridors, and critical infrastructure, particularly in the Northeast.
- Introduction: Historical rail importance, modern terrorism threats, funding disparities
- Rail Security and Cargo Security Post-9/11: Post-9/11 cargo protocols, hazardous materials risks, infrastructure vulnerabilities
- Rail Line, Yard, and Cargo Security: Security Action Items, yard protocols, jurisdictional enforcement challenges
- Commuter Rail Security: Station security measures, police presence, surveillance and detection equipment
- Long-Haul Passenger Train Security: Amtrak vulnerabilities, ticket verification, railroad police enforcement
- Conclusion: Layered security approach, practical limitations of aviation-style screening
✍️ How to write this paper — guide, tools & examples ▾
What makes this paper effective
- Clear historical context: transitions from pre-9/11 security (robbery prevention) to post-9/11 homeland security threats, grounding the argument in real policy change.
- Use of authoritative sources: Government Accountability Office (GAO) reports, Department of Homeland Security directives, and transportation policy documents provide credibility.
- Concrete vulnerability identification: specifies hazardous materials (TIH), geographic risk zones (Northeast U.S., High Threat Urban Areas), and infrastructure targets (bridges, tunnels, signal towers).
- Structured comparison of security gaps: breaks down disparities between air and rail security funding and between different rail service types (commuter vs. long-haul).
Key academic technique demonstrated
The paper uses problem-solution organization paired with gap analysis. It identifies a disconnect between federal security posture (treating rail as lower-risk than aviation) and actual vulnerability (rail's open access, high ridership volume, hazardous cargo). This technique allows the author to establish why existing measures are insufficient without requiring original data—instead leveraging government assessments (GAO, DHS) to make the case for stronger policy coordination.
Structure breakdown
The introduction establishes both the historical importance of rail and the contemporary security paradox: rail has become economically vital yet receives minimal security investment relative to aviation. The body then moves through three operational categories (freight/yard, commuter, long-haul passenger), each with its own access control and screening challenges. The conclusion synthesizes these into a unified recommendation: layered security (yard control, surveillance, access points, screening, cargo protocols) rather than passenger-scanning on the aviation model. This organization allows readers to understand both breadth of the problem and specific site-by-site constraints.
Introduction
The railroad was once the primary mode of domestic transportation in the United States. Its dominance eventually waned because railroad owners attempted to monopolize the transportation industry. However, increased demand for products has spurred renewed demand for secure transportation networks in the post-September 11, 2001 world, where transportation infrastructure has become a target of choice for terrorists. The transportation network within the United States and internationally facilitates the intermodal transfer and delivery of services, goods, passengers, and materials as part of the national and international transportation network. The global supply, logistics, and freight transportation networks are supported mainly by maritime transportation, which has become highly efficient in terms of costs, capacity, and reliability. However, the rapid growth of maritime containerized shipping has placed intense pressures on inland freight transportation systems, particularly rail (Rodrigue, 2008).
The affordability and capacity of rail, which was once viewed as suffering a slow death by transportation experts, has revitalized the rail industry within the United States. Historically, protecting rail service was more of a law enforcement issue than a homeland security issue. The primary threat against rail service was robbery. In early times, Pinkerton Security provided protection for rail service to thwart the efforts of gangs that preyed on trains transporting passengers, gold, and money to banks (Sweet, 2006). Prior to September 11, 2001, the major threat presented to rail service was theft and pilferage of cargo by organized crime and petty criminals from train yards.
The Madrid Bombings caused Homeland Security professionals within the United States to issue warnings about possible terrorist threats against buses and trains, where terrorists would attempt to place bombs in luggage at bus and train stations because of a lack of security and screening procedures at these facilities (Sweet, 2006). The United States government has not taken threats against rail infrastructure as seriously as warranted, because there has not been a terrorist incident on the rail system within the United States (GAO, 2007). This has caused funding for security measures for rail infrastructure to be minuscule in comparison to what is allocated to protect and prevent attacks against aviation infrastructure. This approach by the United States government contradicts its overall posture on security procedures to thwart future terrorist attacks on transportation infrastructure, which includes trains and rail facilities that are very vulnerable to infiltration and attacks by terrorist groups both foreign and domestic (Sweet, 2006).
The perceived vulnerabilities and the attacks of September 11, 2001 resulted in recommendations being made for the improvement of security at rail facilities, such as restricted access, restrictions on information about these facilities, increased security, and increased cybersecurity within rail information systems networks (Sweet, 2006). The Northeastern United States, the most densely populated area in America, is home to several major rail transit centers that are vulnerable to a terrorist attack. The loss of one of these major transit centers or disruption of service because of a terrorist attack can have an adverse impact on the global supply system and economy, because most of the major shipping ports and airports in this region depend on rail as an integral part of the intermodal global transportation network. This region and the United States would be unable to effectively function as the main logistics and supply center if these transportation assets are destroyed or suffer major damage in the event of a terrorist attack, even if there are no injuries or deaths.
Create your account
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.