The New York Times Concerned about the distribution of unusually detailed building information, the American Institute of Architects plans to alert its 70,000 members today to "immediately report any suspicious requests to the appropriate local F.B.I. field office."
October 4, 2001
Architects Put On the Alert Over Requests That Are Rare
By DAVID W. DUNLAPThe statement, which is to be issued in cooperation with the federal General Services Administration, said that architectural and engineering firms have reported "requests for building plans that, in light of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, appear unusual due to the structures identified in the requests or the type of information solicited." While institute officials would not be more specific, it is understood that some requests involved airport terminals and towers, federal office buildings, parking garages and museums, and that the details sought sometimes included mechanical, electrical and structural systems.
James Dinegar, the chief operating officer of the institute, which is based in Washington, said the statement was not meant "to scare off anybody" from giving information.
"We just want people to be alert," Mr. Dinegar said.
Employees of the General Services Administration have been instructed to report any unusual inquiries to the agency's criminal investigation division, a spokeswoman, Viki Reath, said.
The sharing of information is a keystone of architectural practice and scholarship. Plans, sections and elevations of many buildings are readily available in professional magazines, in architectural monographs and studies, through real estate brokers, on Web sites, in libraries and in government databases.
For instance, illustrations of the construction methods used at the World Trade Center are found in "Twin Towers" by Angus Kress Gillespie (Rutgers University Press, 1999) and floor layouts are in the annual "Directory of Manhattan Office Buildings" (First American Real Estate Solutions).
"The fact is that most of this information is universally accessible," said Robert Ivy, editor in chief of Architectural Record. "Designers and architects have to understand how the world is made. As long as they do, it's our job to explain how that works."
Typically, though, such plans do not show intricate or comprehensive details of conduits, risers, duct work and wiring.
Mr. Dinegar would not say how many reports had been received of unusual requests nor would he name any firms involved.
He did say, however, that the institute had received e-mail messages going back several months from a man in Egypt who identified himself as a student and sought unusually detailed building information. These were referred to the Federal Bureau of Investigation, Mr. Dinegar said.
One prominent Manhattan architectural firm received several requests recently for information on projects in this country and abroad that were a "little bit odd in their comprehensiveness," said a spokeswoman, who asked that the firm not be identified out of concern for its security. She said those requests had been referred to the bureau.
"We take pride in making information available," the spokeswoman said. "We go out of our way to help students and we always have. However, as a matter of policy we do not release detailed information about any project without the prior consent of the client."
"Now," she said, "one wants to consider more carefully who's asking and for what purpose and under what circumstances."
The institute has prepared a form for those reporting "unusual" requests. It asks for the identity of the person or organization requesting the building plans; whether they have asked for information before; the type and name of building; and why the firm believes the request is out of the ordinary.
Some information is being withdrawn from public access, at least temporarily. The Federation of American Scientists has removed from its Web site the locations and floor plans of buildings used by American intelligence agencies.
"Suddenly, the baseline of what is a conceivable threat has shifted dramatically," said Steven Aftergood, a senior research analyst at the federation. "It may be that much of that information may be returned. But we prefer to err on the side of caution."
Copyright 2001 The New York Times