"TSA Tries to Assure Congress It Believes in 'Registered Traveler'"

Thursday, June 30, 2005

TSA Tries to Assure Congress It Believes in 'Registered Traveler'
Airport Security Report


With suspicions only increasing on Capitol Hill that Registered Traveler
(RT) is a half-baked idea, TSA Acting Deputy Director Thomas Blank did his
best to assure legislators that the agency considers the program a definite
"go." 

Specifically, Blank told members of the House Homeland Security Subcommittee
on Economic Security, Infrastructure Protection, and Cybersecurity on June
17 that TSA would finally clear up several nagging RT policy issues by "the
end of the fiscal year." That would be Sept. 30, which is just three and a
half months away. With TSA in the midst of yet another round of leadership
changes, that deadline could be a little tough to meet. 

Some of the questions TSA expects to answer by that time include whether the
agency will continue running the program as it has in the first five pilot
sites or whether it will expand RT on the semi-privatized model that is just
getting under way at Orlando International Airport (MCO). Blank also said
there would be answers on how to verify the identities of passengers
enrolled in the program, how to make the program interoperable, how and when
to expand the program, and what airports to expand it to. 

The June 17 hearing was the second on RT within a week's time (see Airport
Security Report, June 15) before Chairman Dan Lungren's (R-Calif.) panel,
and this one featured Blank as the only witness. The back-to-back hearings
only seemed to amplify legislators' concerns, which Blank, at the second
hearing, came prepared to address. 

One concern involves interoperability, or the notion that travelers who
register at one airport should receive transferable benefits at other
participating airports. Blank stressed, however, that interoperability was
not the point of the five-airport pilot. Rather, it was to test different
"operational and technological configurations." Come Sept. 30, TSA will
start an interoperability demonstration. 

Of the seven or so subcommittee members who put in appearances at the
hearing, all seemed to be wondering whether RT is worth continuing, given
its seemingly mediocre performance in the five-airport pilot. Additionally,
certain ethical concerns with having a private firm market the Orlando
version, concerns that were articulated by several witnesses at the first
hearing, seems to have impressed many of the legislators as well. 

In response, Blank urged the panel to remember that the pilot "was only a
pilot," and by nature limited in what TSA hoped it would accomplish. Indeed,
not all the conclusions have been extracted from it yet. In the case of
Orlando, Blank emphasized that the agency deliberately avoided setting too
many ground rules, to see what the private firm would do. Since the agency
retains ultimate control at all RT sites, it can immediately shut down any
operations that seem questionable. 

Some legislators, such as Rep. Norman Dicks (D-Wash.), suggested that there
are still alternatives to RT in providing "known travelers" or frequent
flyers with shorter checkpoint lines. One such option would be the frequent
flyer lines that some of the airlines have established at certain airports,
he noted. 

Following up on Dicks' remarks, Rep. Pete DeFazio (D-Ore.) wondered why RT
could not continue as a self-financing federal program. He also expressed
the fear arising from the Orlando model where airports could profit by
participating. That would encourage airports to bring pressure to bear in
shutting down any existing frequent-flyer lines, which cost nothing for the
people who participate. The airports might be motivated to send those
customers back to the end of the line and charge them $79.95 to join RT, he
said. 

The give-and-take on June 17 deviated from the Registered Traveler program
to other issues, such as cargo screening and employee access, indicating
that legislators are getting the message that there is much more to airport
security than passenger and bag screening. 

One point about employee access that several legislations, including
Lungren, ranking member Loretta Sanchez (D-Calif.) and Rep. Bennie Thompson
(D- Miss.), really drilled Blank on was TSA's apparently common practice of
putting new screeners at checkpoints before their background checks are
complete. Lungren, for example, noted that registered travelers have to get
complete background checks before they get the privilege of a shortened
line, but TSA screeners don't need this before they are put on the job. 

Initially, Blank responded by saying TSA would probably have to align its
policies for employee and registered travelers. A little later, he
backtracked by saying he wasn't sure if screeners were ever deployed before
getting full background checks. He also admitted, under questioning, that
the annual screener turnover rate is still as high as 23 percent. But then
again, that's similar to the rate at Ritz-Carlton. 

Lungren replied that it was the first time he heard TSA compared to the
Ritz. 

Contact: 
House Committee on Homeland Security, (202) 226-8417, e-mail:
homeland@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx


 Do you have an opinion about this story?
Share it with other readers in our CAA Discussion Forums

http://www.californiaaviation.org/dcfp/dcboard.php


*****************************************