U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Publishing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001

23–245 PDF 2017

LONG LINES, SHORT PATIENCE: THE TSA AIRPORT 

SCREENING EXPERIENCE 

HEARING 

BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

ONE HUNDRED FOURTEENTH CONGRESS 

SECOND SESSION 

MAY 25, 2016 

Serial No. 114–73 

Printed for the use of the Committee on Homeland Security 

Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/ 


Congress.#13
(II) 

COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY 

MICHAEL T. MCCAUL, Texas, Chairman 

LAMAR SMITH, Texas 

PETER T. KING, New York 

MIKE ROGERS, Alabama 

CANDICE S. MILLER, Michigan, Vice Chair 

JEFF DUNCAN, South Carolina 

TOM MARINO, Pennsylvania 

LOU BARLETTA, Pennsylvania 

SCOTT PERRY, Pennsylvania 

CURT CLAWSON, Florida 

JOHN KATKO, New York 

WILL HURD, Texas 

EARL L. ‘‘BUDDY’’ CARTER, Georgia 

MARK WALKER, North Carolina 

BARRY LOUDERMILK, Georgia 

MARTHA MCSALLY, Arizona 

JOHN RATCLIFFE, Texas 

DANIEL M. DONOVAN, JR., New York 

BENNIE G. THOMPSON, Mississippi 

LORETTA SANCHEZ, California 

SHEILA JACKSON LEE, Texas 

JAMES R. LANGEVIN, Rhode Island 

BRIAN HIGGINS, New York 

CEDRIC L. RICHMOND, Louisiana 

WILLIAM R. KEATING, Massachusetts 

DONALD M. PAYNE, JR., New Jersey 

FILEMON VELA, Texas 

BONNIE WATSON COLEMAN, New Jersey 

KATHLEEN M. RICE, New York 

NORMA J. TORRES, California 

BRENDAN P. SHIELDS, Staff Director 

JOAN V. O’HARA, General Counsel 

MICHAEL S. TWINCHEK, Chief Clerk 

I. LANIER AVANT, Minority Staff Director 

(III) 

C O N T E N T S 

Page 

STATEMENTS

The Honorable Michael T. McCaul, a Representative in Congress From the 

State of Texas, and Chairman, Committee on Homeland Security: 

Oral Statement ..................................................................................................... 1 

Prepared Statement ............................................................................................. 3 

The Honorable Bennie G. Thompson, a Representative in Congress From 

the State of Mississippi, and Ranking Member, Committee on Homeland 

Security: 

Oral Statement ..................................................................................................... 4 

Prepared Statement ............................................................................................. 6 

WITNESS

Hon. Peter V. Neffenger, Administrator, Transportation Security Administration, U.S. Department of Homeland Security .................................................... 8 

FOR THE RECORD

The Honorable Bennie G. Thompson, a Representative in Congress From 

the State of Mississippi, and Ranking Member, Committee on Homeland 

Security: 

Letter ..................................................................................................................... 46 

The Honorable Martha McSally, a Representative in Congress From the 

State of Arizona: 

Letter ..................................................................................................................... 32 

APPENDIX

Questions From Honorable Martha McSally for Peter V. Neffenger .................. 49 

(1) 

LONG LINES, SHORT PATIENCE: THE TSA 

AIRPORT SCREENING EXPERIENCE 

Wednesday, May 25, 2016 

U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, 

COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY, 

Washington, DC. 

The committee met, pursuant to call, at 10:05 a.m., in Room 311, 

Cannon House Office Building, Hon. Michael T. McCaul [Chairman 

of the committee] presiding. 

Present: Representatives McCaul, King, Rogers, Perry, Clawson, 

Katko, Hurd, Carter, Walker, McSally, Ratcliffe, Donovan, Thompson, Jackson Lee, Langevin, Richmond, Keating, Payne, Vela, Watson Coleman, Rice, and Torres. 

Chairman MCCAUL. The Committee on Homeland Security will 

come to order. 

Committee is meeting today to examine the security challenges 

brought forth by increased passenger screening, checkpoint wait 

times. 

But before I begin my opening statement, I would like to take a 

moment of silence for the victims and their families of EgyptAir 

804. 

I now recognize myself for an opening statement. 

Today we face a crisis at our airports. We have all read the headlines—3-hour-long security lines, 430 American Airlines passengers 

stranded overnight in Chicago O’Hare, travelers from Atlanta, 

Charlotte, and Alaska waiting forever to be screened, causing missing flights and further delays. 

More than 3,000 bags have failed to get loaded onto planes in 

time to Phoenix. An 80 percent increase in wait times at JFK Airport compared to this time last year. 

This is unacceptable, and it is time for Congress to act. 

Administrator, the American people are angry and frustrated as 

we head into the busiest travel season of the year starting this Memorial Day weekend, and they deserve answers. 

This crisis didn’t just come out of nowhere. Airports and airlines 

have been sounding the alarm for months. There is no doubt that 

part of the challenge we face is a high terror threat environment, 

but wait times are not soaring simply because security is much 

tighter. It is because the TSA bureaucracy has gotten weaker. 

The agency has struggled to keep up with the high demand and 

has been unable to put the right people at the right place at the 

right time. Change is not happening fast enough. 

2 

Admiral Neffenger, I know you are working hard to reform TSA’s 

broken bureaucracy, and today I hope to hear how you will confront 

this crisis swiftly. 

But Congress will not sit back as the situation gets worse, and 

that is why this committee and the House of Representatives 

passed legislation to fix this problem. I commend my colleague, Mr. 

Katko, for offering these bills. 

Among other measures, our legislation would accelerate TSA’s 

PreCheck program, which helps reduce wait times by putting lowrisk travelers through expedited screening. Unfortunately, the Senate has failed to pass these bills, which in my judgment is unconscionable. 

So today I would like to send my message to my colleagues in 

the other body—it is time to get moving, because the American 

people are fed up with this. 

This week we will introduce yet another bill to attack this problem, and I hope that this time we can get it to the President’s desk 

more quickly. 

In the coming months, we will take a broader look at TSA, including first-ever authorization of the agency which will give us an 

opportunity to make wider reforms and long-term changes. 

Additionally, we plan to take up legislation to enhance TSA’s 

Screening Partnership Program. But as I noted, we must also take 

into account serious aviation threats that we face. I think the 

events of the Egyptian airliner demonstrate that. 

Although investigators are still working to determine the cause 

of EgyptAir crash, one fact is clear: Terrorists are trying to bring 

down airplanes, and the aviation sector is their crown jewel target. 

This month I led a Congressional delegation to the Middle East 

and northern Africa to examine the spread of terrorist safe havens, 

and we walked away concerned that screening is inadequate at 

some of these last-point-of-departure airports that have direct 

flights into the United States. 

For instance, airports like Cairo lack full-body scanners to detect 

nonmetallic IEDs, and they lack access to comprehensive terror 

watch lists for screening their employees. 

This is a concern we know because militants are trying to recruit 

insiders and inside jobs to take down passenger jets. 

We have seen this twice in recent months, including an attack 

in Somalia and one against a Russian jet flying out of Sharm El 

Sheikh in Egypt. 

But this is not just a problem in the Middle East or northern Africa. Just this past December, Charles de Gaulle Airport in Paris, 

which has 50 direct flights into the United States every day, they 

fired 70 employees who were suspected of having extremist connections—70. We have to help our foreign partners weed out these extremists. 

Again, the House and this committee passed 2 bills to ramp up 

security at overseas airports and yet again these bills are sitting 

in the Senate stalling, waiting for action. It is unconscionable. It 

is time for the Senate to act. The President will sign them into law. 

We cannot afford further delay because American lives are at risk. 

As we adapt to the evolving threat, we must also make sure 

agencies like TSA adapt their business models to keep travel flowVerDate Mar 15 2010 14:19 Feb 28, 2017 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 H:\THUMBDRIVE\114TH HEARINGS\16FL0525\HM146000.TXT HEATH
3 

ing smoothly. Terrorists would like nothing more than for us to undermine our own economy by allowing air transportation to grind 

to a halt. 

Admiral Neffenger, we have given TSA the resources it asked for 

to make screening more efficient. Congress even granted a recent 

request to reallocate $34 million to hire nearly 800 new TSA Officers before July and to pay for additional overtime for existing personnel. 

Today, we expect you to tell us how you are putting these resources to work and how you are going to address the crisis at our 

airports once and for all. 

I want to thank the admiral for being here today. I want to 

thank you for your service to our country. 

[The statement of Chairman McCaul follows:] 

STATEMENT OF CHAIRMAN MICHAEL MCCAUL

MAY 25, 2016 

Today we face a crisis at our airports. We’ve all read the headlines, and we know 

how bad it’s gotten: 

• Three-hour-long security lines. 

• 450 American Airlines passengers stranded overnight in Chicago O’Hare. 

• Travelers from Atlanta, Charlotte, and Alaska waiting forever to be screened, 

causing missed flights and further delays. 

• More than 3,000 bags fail to get loaded onto planes in time in Phoenix. 

• An 80 percent increase in wait times at JFK airport compared to this time last 

year. 

Administrator, the American people are angry and frustrated as we head into the 

busiest travel season of the year, starting this Memorial Day weekend. And they 

deserve answers. 

This crisis didn’t just come out of nowhere. Airports and airlines have been sounding the alarm for months. 

There is no doubt that part of the challenge we face is a high terror threat environment. But wait times are not soaring simply because security is that much tighter. It’s because the TSA bureaucracy has gotten weaker. 

The agency has struggled to keep up with high demand and has been unable to 

put the right people in the right place at the right time. Change is not happening 

fast enough. 

Admiral Neffenger, I know you are working to reform TSA’s broken bureaucracy, 

and today I hope to hear how you will confront this crisis swiftly. 

But Congress will not sit back as the situation gets worse. That is why this committee and the House of Representatives passed legislation to fix the problem. I 

commend my colleague, Mr. Katko, for offering these bills. 

Among other measures, our legislation would accelerate TSA’s PreCheck program, 

which helps reduce wait times by putting low-risk travelers through expedited 

screening. 

Unfortunately, the Senate has failed to pass these bills, which is unconscionable. 

So today I would like to send my message to my colleagues in the other body: It’s 

time to get moving—because the American people are fed up. 

This week we will introduce yet another bill to attack the problem, and I hope 

this time we can get it to the President’s desk more quickly. 

And in the coming months, we will take a broader look at TSA, including the firstever reauthorization of the agency, which will give us an opportunity to make wider 

reforms and long-term changes. 

Additionally, we plan to take up legislation to enhance TSA’s Screening Partnership Program. 

But as I noted, we must also take account of the serious aviation threats we face. 

Although investigators are still working to determine the cause of the EgyptAir 

crash, one fact is clear: Terrorists are trying to bring down airplanes, and the aviation sector is still their crown-jewel target. 

This month I led a Congressional delegation to the Middle East and North Africa 

to examine the spread of terror safe havens. And we walked away concerned that 

screening is inadequate at some airports which have direct flights to America. 

4 

For instance, airports like Cairo lack full-body scanners to detect non-metallic 

IEDs, and they lack access to comprehensive terrorist watch lists for screening their 

employees. 

This is a concern because we know that militants are trying to recruit ‘‘insiders’’ 

to take down passenger jets. We’ve seen this twice in recent months, including an 

attack in Somalia and one against a Russian jet flying out of Sharm El Sheikh in 

Egypt. 

But this is not just a problem in the Middle East or North Africa. Just this past 

December, Charles De Gaulle airport in Paris—which has 50 direct flights into the 

United States every day—fired 70 employees who were suspected of having extremist connections. Seventy employees. 

We have got to help our foreign partners weed out extremists. The House has 

passed 2 bills from this committee to ramp up security at overseas airports, and yet 

again, they are sitting in the Senate waiting for action. We cannot afford further 

delay. 

But as we adapt to the evolving threat, we must also make sure agencies like TSA 

adapt their business models to keep travel flowing smoothly. Terrorists would like 

nothing more than for us to undermine our own economy by allowing air transportation grind to a halt. 

Admiral Neffenger, we’ve given TSA the resources it asked for to make screening 

more efficient. Congress even granted a recent request to reallocate $34 million to 

hire nearly 800 new TSA officers before July and to pay for additional overtime for 

existing personnel. 

Today, we expect you tell us how you are putting these resources to work—and 

how you are going to address the crisis at our airports once and for all. 

Thank you. 

Chairman MCCAUL. With that, the Chair now recognizes the 

Ranking Member of the committee. 

Mr. THOMPSON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would like to thank 

you for calling today’s hearing. 

I would also like to welcome Administrator Neffenger and thank 

him in advance for his testimony. 

To be clear, the flying public expects and deserves efficient, safe, 

secure, reliable air transit. The Transportation Security Administration finds itself at the center of the Federal Government’s effort 

to ensure secure passage of passenger and cargo. As you know, Mr. 

Administrator, the importance of this role can hardly be understated. 

The agency is at a critical point in its short history. TSA is still 

implementing reforms after covert testing last year revealed serious gaps in security screening. Now, long lines and record wait 

times at airport checkpoints are having spillover effects throughout 

our entire aviation system. 

Passengers are understandably anxious as they hear stories 

about fellow passengers who despite their best efforts missed 

flights. Asking passengers to arrive 3 hours before a domestic departure is unacceptable. 

In addition to the stress on passengers to wear the right clothes, 

decide whether to check a bag, pay exorbitant baggage fees, avoid 

packing prohibited items, and make tight connections, the stress on 

the flying public is felt most severely by airline and airport personnel. Unfortunately, it is the men and women who are the face 

of TSA who get blamed, the Transportation Security Officers. 

Travel volume substantially increased this year. Yet, TSA has 

failed to keep pace with this growth. As a result, there is an insufficient number of Transportation Security Officers in our Nation’s 

airports. The current situation where we have too few screeners 

and far more passengers did not occur without warning. 

5 

In fiscal year 2011, there were approximately 45,000 TSOs 

screening 642 million passengers. In fiscal year 2016, TSA had 

3,000 fewer TSOs screening roughly 740 million anticipated passengers, almost 100 million more passengers and 3,000 fewer 

screeners. In the fiscal year 2017 budget, TSA requested funding 

to hire an additional 320 TSOs. 

To those of us who are familiar with travel volume trends, this 

did not seem like enough. More recently, TSA, as the Chairman indicated, has announced its plan to on-board 768 TSOs by June 15. 

Increasing staffing resources is certainly a good thing, but only if 

the proper vetting and training occur before more TSOs are added. 

Administrator Neffenger, I want to know if TSA has the money 

necessary to achieve its mission. At Secretary Johnson’s request, 

Congress recently reprogrammed $34 million in TSA accounts to 

pay for overtime and other costs associated with responding to the 

wait-time crisis. While these funds will surely aid TSA in addressing staffing shortages in the short term, moving money around is 

not a substitute for infusing new money into an operation. 

TSA should have access to all of the aviation security fees collected by the flying public to bolster security. Yet, the passage of 

the Budget Act of 2013, TSA is required to divert $13 billion collected in security fees toward the deficit reduction for the next 10 

years. This year alone, $1.25 billion has been diverted. 

Presently, I am working with Representative Peter DeFazio, the 

Ranking Member on the Transportation Committee, in his efforts 

to ensure that TSA can retain the fees it collects and put them 

back into our aviation system. In the absence of more money, new 

resources is absolutely important. Congress and TSA must resist 

Band-Aid fixes to complicated and—security challenges. Patching 

and plugging holes is not the answer. 

Moreover, dismantling TSA is not the answer. Many of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle are calling for a return to the 

pre-9/11 privatization model. Mr. Chairman, as you have indicated 

also, after the downed Egyptian airliner, which is still under investigation, this would not be the way to go. 

As one prominent airport commissioner recently acknowledged, 

the benefits of privatization are very marginal and there is a huge 

cost in time associated with the transition. We need to look for 

long-term solutions. One solution, as I have indicated and have 

written a letter to you, Mr. Administrator, is to assign the nearly 

2,500 TSOs designated as Behavior Detection Officers to checkpoint screening operations. 

As you know, the SPOT program has been subject to a GAO review. It is questionable about its success. But we have spent $1 billion on this program, and we could put that money to good use. 

So I look forward, Mr. Neffenger. Look around the committee 

room here, all our Members use the airports to come to work every 

week. I am sure, like I, they are anxiously awaiting your testimony. 

I yield back. 

[The statement of Ranking Member Thompson follows:] 

6 

STATEMENT OF RANKING MEMBER BENNIE G. THOMPSON

MAY 25, 2016 

To be clear, the flying public expects and deserves efficient, safe, secure, reliable 

air transit. The Transportation Security Administration finds itself at the center of 

the Federal Government’s efforts to ensure secure passage of passengers and cargo. 

As you know, the importance of this role can hardly be understated. 

The agency is at a critical point in its short history. TSA is still implementing 

reforms after covert testing last year revealed serious gaps in security screening. 

Now, long lines and record wait times at airport checkpoints are having spillover 

effects throughout our entire aviation system. 

Passengers are understandably anxious, as they hear stories about fellow passengers who, despite their best efforts, missed flights. Asking passengers to arrive 

3 hours before a domestic departure is unacceptable. 

In addition to the stress on passengers to wear the right clothes, decide whether 

to check a bag, pay exorbitant baggage fees, avoid packing prohibited items, and 

make tight connections, the stress on the flying public is felt most severely by airline and airport personnel. Unfortunately, it is the men and women who are the 

‘‘face of TSA’’ who get blamed—the Transportation Security Officers. 

Travel volume substantially increased this year, yet TSA has failed to keep pace 

with this growth. As a result, there is an insufficient number of Transportation Security Officers in our Nation’s airports. The current situation where we have too few 

screeners and far more passengers did not occur without warning. In fiscal year 

2011, there were approximately 45,000 TSOs screening 642 million passengers. In 

fiscal year 2016, TSA has about 3,000 fewer TSOs screening the roughly 740 million 

anticipated passengers. In its fiscal year 2017 budget, TSA requested funding to 

hire an additional 323 TSOs. 

To those of us who are familiar with travel volume trends, this did not seem like 

enough. More recently, TSA announced its plans to on-board 768 TSOs by June 15. 

Increasing staffing resources is certainly a good thing—but only if the proper vetting 

and training occur before more TSOs are added. 

Administrator Neffenger, I want to know if TSA has the money necessary to 

achieve its mission. At Secretary Johnson’s request, Congress recently reprogrammed $34 million in TSA accounts to pay for overtime and other costs associated 

with responding to the wait times crisis. 

While these funds will surely aid TSA in addressing staffing shortages in the 

short term, moving money around is not a substitute for infusing new money into 

an operation. TSA should have access to all of the aviation security fees collected 

from the flying public to bolster security. 

Yet, with the passage of the Budget Act of 2013, TSA is required to divert $13 

billion collected in security fees towards deficit reduction for 10 years. This year 

alone, $1.25 billion has been diverted. Presently, I am working with Representative 

Peter DeFazio, the Ranking Member on the Transportation Committee, in his effort 

to ensure that TSA can retain the fees it collects and put it back into our aviation 

security system. 

In the absence of more, new resources, temporary fixes may be all that TSA can 

offer to address a challenge that will only intensify as the United States experiences 

more economic growth and more Americans travel via commercial aviation. Congress and TSA must resist Band-Aid fixes to complicated and well-understood aviation security challenges. Patching and plugging holes are not answers. 

Moreover, dismantling TSA is not the answer. Many of my colleagues on the other 

side of the aisle are calling for a return to the pre-9/11 privatization model. 

Mr. Chairman, after the downed Egyptian Airliner, which is still under investigation, and after your observations as you recently traveled abroad, you should know 

that any facet of aviation security that mirrors a pre-9/11 state should be reconsidered. 

Furthermore, it is nonsensical to believe that reducing TSA’s role would solve immediate problems. The amount of time and resources that it takes for an airport 

to transition would likely cause more havoc, delays, and frustrations for passengers. 

As one prominent airport commissioner recently acknowledged, the benefits of privatization are ‘‘very marginal and there’s a huge cost in time associated with the 

transition.’’ 

We need to look for long-term solutions. One solution that could be implemented 

at little or no additional cost would be to assign the nearly 2,500 TSOs designated 

as Behavior Detection Officers to checkpoint screening operations. Alarmingly, while 

the number of TSOs has declined, TSA has spent close to a billion dollars on the 

Screening Passengers by Observation Techniques (SPOT) Program, a behavioral deVerDate Mar 15 2010 14:19 Feb 28, 2017 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 H:\THUMBDRIVE\114TH HEARINGS\16FL0525\HM146000.TXT HEATH
7 

tection program that GAO has repeatedly said lacks scientific validation as an effective security program. 

The program is known more for racial and ethnic profiling than detecting terrorist 

activity. The numbers prove this. Administrator Neffenger, I have written to you 

asking your strong consideration of reallocating Behavior Detection Officers to perform traditional screening functions within the current TSA Staffing Model. I would 

like to hear from you regarding my proposal. 

Finally, I would caution you, Administrator Neffenger, to not lose sight of the 

need to enhance TSO training so that front-line workers can better balance security 

effectiveness and line efficiency. I commend your actions in the wake of last year’s 

findings regarding deficiencies in the security screening process by standing up the 

TSA Academy program and ordering more training for TSOs. 

TSA must also focus its attention on acquiring technologies of the future. We 

must make the investments now to ensure that the technology at our checkpoints 

achieves maximum effectiveness, thereby increasing efficiency. 

We all have a vested interest in getting TSA on the right track. We travel weekly, 

our families and constituents are members of the traveling public. While we are 

pressing for solutions, we must ensure that they do not come at the expense of our 

security. 

Chairman MCCAUL. I thank the Ranking Member. 

Other Members are reminded that opening statements may be 

submitted for the record. 

We are pleased to have here today Admiral Neffenger on this 

very important and timely topic. Admiral Peter Neffenger serves as 

the sixth administrator of the Transportation Security Administration, where he leads security operations at more than 450 airports 

within the United States and a workforce of almost 60,000 employees. 

Prior to joining TSA, Admiral Neffenger served as the 29th vice 

commandant of the United States Coast Guard and the Coast 

Guard’s deputy commandant for operations. 


h:\seals\114731.eps
8 

We thank you, sir, for being here today, and we also thank you 

for your service. Your full written statement will be appear in the 

record. The Chair now recognizes Admiral Neffenger. 

STATEMENT OF HON. PETER V. NEFFENGER, ADMINISTRATOR, 

TRANSPORTATION SECURITY ADMINISTRATION, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY 

Admiral NEFFENGER. Thank you and good morning, Chairman 

McCaul, Ranking Member Thompson, distinguished Members of 

the committee. Thank you for the opportunity to appear before you 

today. I sincerely appreciate the committee’s oversight of TSA’s security operations, ensuring that our agency has the appropriate resources to accomplish its important counterterrorism mission. 

Since taking the oath of office on July 4 of last year, I have traveled throughout the country and around the world to meet with 

employees at all levels of our agency, and they are truly impressive. Their patriotism, their sense of duty and their commitment to 

TSA’s National security mission is exemplary. 

But to ensure their success, we need a mature enterprise that delivers the tools they need to get the job done and unwavering support from their leaders. 

Last week, EgyptAir Flight 804 crashed into the Mediterranean, 

and I wanted to express my sincere condolences to the families of 

the victims. It was a tragic loss of life. While we don’t yet know 

what happened to that airplane, it is a stark reminder of the importance of TSA’s daily mission. 

First and foremost, our job is to protect the traveling public in 

what has become a very dynamic and challenging threat environment. The threat is very real. To that end, and in just 10 months, 

I have undertaken a systemic and deliberate transformation of 

TSA. 

I set a renewed focus on security, revised alarm resolution procedures, made investments in new technology and have retrained the 

entire workforce. We are holding ourselves accountable to high 

standards of performance, and I am supporting our front-line officers in their critical mission. 

We have reinvigorated our partnerships with the airlines, with 

airport operators and the trade and travel industries, and are 

working closely with Congress and this committee to address our 

security mission. 

I am investing in our people. With the help of Congress, I directed a complete overhaul of our approach to how we train our 

workforce at all levels of the agency. We established the first ever 

TSA academy on January 1 of this year. This intensive training 

will enable us to achieve consistency, develop a common culture, instill our core values and raise performance across the entire workforce. 

I also ordered a review of all personnel policies and practices. 

This has led to a number of significant changes—elimination of the 

arbitrary use of directed reassignments, restrictions on permanent 

change of station relocation costs, and significant controls on bonuses at all levels. 

We are overhauling management practices, conducting an independent review of acquisition programs, building a planning, proVerDate Mar 15 2010 14:19 Feb 28, 2017 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 H:\THUMBDRIVE\114TH HEARINGS\16FL0525\HM146000.TXT HEATH
9 

gramming, budgeting and execution process, and building a human 

capital management system to address recruitment, development, 

promotion, assignment, and retention. 

The screening mission requires a similar fundamental reassessment. This year, we project our checkpoints Nation-wide will screen 

some 740 million people. By comparison, in 2013, TSA screened 

643 million people. That is an increase of 100 million people in just 

4 years, while our full-time workforce has reduced by more than 12 

percent. 

That and our renewed focus on security, are significant contributors to the situation we face today. So we have a challenge this 

summer, which we are aggressively meeting head on. Among other 

things, we have established a National Incident Command Center 

to specifically monitor checkpoint screening operations on an hourly basis. 

We are tracking projected volume, staffing, and lane availability, 

actual wait times, which will allow us to address critical concerns 

in real time. This command center includes staffing from airlines 

and critical industry associations, and they are conducting daily 

calls with the busiest airports and major airlines to plan that day’s 

operations in what we foresee in the coming days. 

Our goals are to ensure effective screening and to maximize our 

screening capacity to achieve shorter line waits. 

Additionally, we are providing more overtime and 768 new TSA 

Officers. We are also converting, with the help of Congress and the 

reprogramming request, our front-line officers from part-time to 

full-time, as necessary, to increase—immediately increase screening capacity and help improve retention and morale. I thank you 

for supporting these efforts. 

I have given Federal security directors the flexibility to redeploy 

Behavior Detection Officers to perform additional screening functions, and they have done so and they have pushed the Behavioral 

Detection Officers back into the screening checkpoints. 

We have deployed additional canine teams and activated our National volunteer deployment force to be available to move to areas 

of greatest need. 

Finally, we are now seeing enrollments in TSA PreCheck that 

are averaging more than 15,000 new enrollments a day. That is 

more than almost 3 times what we saw last year at this time. 

To intensify our agency-wide focus on mission effectiveness, I 

have brought in new staff from outside the agency. I have a new 

deputy administrator, a new chief of staff, a new chief of operations, a new head of intelligence, and other key positions. 

I have also directed several leadership and operational changes 

at the National, regional, and airport levels. 

At Chicago O’Hare, a new leadership team is now overseeing 

screening operations, and with the support and hard work of the 

talented workforce at O’Hare, immediate adjustments, in addition 

to some infusion from the reprogramming have dramatically improved passenger through-put, even as volume has increased beyond 90,000 passengers each day. 

I have directed a fundamental review of the staffing structure of 

our screening operations. We must match operational capacity to 

the demands of projected and real screening volume, and we are 

10 

continuing to work closely with the Department and to Congress to 

adjust our appropriations to allow us to match resources with mission demands. 

Finally, in aggressively pursuing long-term solutions to the growing volume of airline travel, we established an innovation task 

force earlier this year to explore and develop new approaches to 

airport security. 

One example is a public-private partnership in Atlanta, where 

the first 2 automated lanes became operational this week. Now, 

they are already vastly improving screening effectiveness and efficiency, and we look forward to the results of the first couple weeks 

of that operation. 

We have similar projects envisioned for other major airport hubs 

across the country. The airlines and airports have been huge partners in these efforts. Clearly, this summer travel season is going 

to be busy, and in the short-term, TSA, airlines, airports, Congress 

and travelers working together can improve the passenger experience, while we maintain security that we need. 

TSA is dedicated to ensuring better efficiency, while remaining 

acutely focused on our counterterrorism mission. We cannot and we 

will not compromise on the security of the traveling public. 

My guiding principles, which I expressed in my administrator’s 

intent, are focus on mission, invest in people, and commit to excellence. We are pursuing these objectives every day. As administrator, I will continue to do so until we achieve and sustain success 

in every aspect of this agency, in every mission, in every office, in 

every location where we operate, and with every single employee. 

Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to appear before 

you today and for the committee’s support, and I look forward to 

your questions. 

Chairman MCCAUL. Thank you, Admiral. I now recognize myself 

for questions. 

Let me just say first, that all Americans experienced the horror 

on 9/11 of airplanes being turned into cruise missiles and turned 

against us, bringing down the World Trade Center, hitting the Pentagon and attempting to hit this building. 

It still remains the crown jewel of aviation. We know that alQaeda in the Arabian Peninsula is still intent on this. We know 

that ISIS in the Sinai was able to pull off Sharm El Sheikh, the 

downing of a Russian airliner. 

As I mentioned in my opening remarks, I recently had the experience to go to Northern Sinai where ISIS exists. I also looked at 

the Cairo Airport, which has a daily flight into JFK airport. I have 

to say, I am concerned about the state of security there. 

I am also concerned with the state of security at Charles De 

Gaulle, where 70 extremists were weeded out of the process, and 

we have 50 flights per day flying into the United States. 

This is the external operation that keeps me up at night. 

Can you tell me, sir, what TSA is doing to protect these lastpoint-of-departure airports, particularly in these high-threat areas? 

Admiral NEFFENGER. Yes, sir. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Like 

you, I am very focused on the safety of inbound flights to the 

United States. 

11 

So we look at—there are a number of things we do for last-pointof-departure airports. First and foremost is working through the 

international community to continually try to raise global standards to the highest possible level. 

In addition, with respect to last-point-of-departure airports, we 

have put additional standards and requirements in place for any 

aircraft that intends to fly directly to the United States without 

any intermediate stops. 

That includes screening of passengers, screening of cargo, screening of the aircraft itself, as well as vetting of any individuals that 

are on-board those flights coming to the United States. 

In addition to that, following the Metrojet incident, we put a 

number of additional security measures in place at certain airports 

of interest and concern in the region, that have added significant 

additional requirements to aircraft and personnel intending to fly 

directly to the United States from those LPDs. 

Chairman MCCAUL. Well, again, this legislation I mentioned that 

is sitting in the Senate that has not passed would help you and 

give you authorities to assist these airports overseas with flights 

coming directly into the United States, and yet, it has been stalled. 

You know, when I didn’t see full-body scanners in Cairo, that 

concerns me because of the non-metallic IED threat. Now, this can 

be fixed, and we can’t even share proper intelligence with the 

Egyptians at that airport to properly vet their own employees and 

screen passengers. 

I worry about this, sir, and I hope that I can work with you to 

expedite this process. I have met with the Egyptians, the President, and the ambassador, I am working with them. I think they 

are working in good faith with the United States to ensure the 

safety of Americans as well. 

With respect to the lines, in the President’s budget request, there 

is a request for an additional 350 screeners. However, 2 weeks ago, 

TSA came back to the Congress and asked to have $34 million reprogrammed, and we granted that request for 768 TSOs, which will 

come on-line, I think, by the end of June, I hope, or early July. But 

this was really not our first rodeo. Why didn’t we see this coming? 

Admiral NEFFENGER. That is a good question, and as you know, 

when I came on-board last year on the heels of the Inspector General’s results, it was immediately apparent to me that one of the 

challenges we were going to have is enough screening staff to man 

the checkpoints effectively. 

As you recall, we stopped a practice known as managed inclusion, which was the practice of randomly assigning people out of 

the standard lanes, unvetted individuals, just randomly assigned to 

the PreCheck lane. 

One of the discoveries out of our root cause analysis in working 

with the Inspector General was that introduced unacceptable risk 

into the system. In doing that, I knew that that would dramatically 

increase the number of people back in the standard lanes, and we 

weren’t staffed to the level we needed to man all the lanes possible. 

So, I came to Congress, and Congress was very gracious in granting a request to halt any further reductions. We had planned to 

drop another 1,600 people in fiscal year 2016. Then when we got 

12 

the appropriations bill in December, we immediately began to do 

accelerated hiring. 

The additional 768 is on top of what we have requested for fiscal 

year 2017 and, in my opinion, is necessary to meet the near-term 

challenge of the increased volume this summer and then moving 

forward. 

So, we have been working very aggressively to move that, but as 

you know, there is a lag associated with getting the funding and 

then getting it hired, the—— 

Chairman MCCAUL. I agree with that, but you have a lot of parttime employees on staff. 

Admiral NEFFENGER. We do. 

Chairman MCCAUL. Do you intend to make a second request to 

reprogram monies that have already been appropriated to TSA to 

move part-time employees to full-time? 

Admiral NEFFENGER. Well, I think it is important that we move 

more part-timers to full time because it drops my attrition rate 

dramatically and it is instant capability that I can put to use. We 

are working through the administration now on whether there is 

a need for a second reprogramming request. And—— 

Chairman MCCAUL. Well, I think about 20 percent of your employees are part-time. In my judgment, they are already trained to 

do the job. It seems to me that would cause, overnight would ramp 

up your personnel force to deal with the long lines. We know we 

anticipate those going into the summer season. 

As I mentioned earlier, we plan to introduce legislation. We met 

with over 30 airline representatives. They expressed concerns that 

there was not the proper coordination at the local level with the 

field security directors at TSA, that they didn’t have flexibility, 

that the staffing model didn’t reflect the peak time that the flights 

were coming in. 

In large part, this would solve a lot of these staffing problems if 

there was better communication at the local level and these local 

directors were empowered to make decisions based on what is happening at the local airports. Do you agree with that? 

Admiral NEFFENGER. I absolutely agree with that. In fact, one of 

the first things I did last fall when I brought all my Federal security directors together for the first time is to direct them to take 

responsibility for their local region. I have given them full authority. I like institutionalizing ideas like that so that they stay, because I think that is an important way to go forward—— 

Chairman MCCAUL. That is what this legislation would do. It 

would require TSA to basically assess its staffing allocation model 

and also mandate that they get local input from the airlines and 

the airports. Would you agree with that? 

Admiral NEFFENGER. Absolutely. In fact, that is what we are 

doing right now and I would like to make that a permanent practice at TSA. 

Chairman MCCAUL. Another element of the bill is the TSA’s Behavioral Detection Officers who roam around the airport. There are 

about 3,000 of them. If they can be redeployed to the front screening end process, to me that would help solve a lot of these problems. I think the Ranking Member mentioned this in his opening 

13 

statement. Do you agree that that would be an appropriate response? 

Admiral NEFFENGER. Well, we are redeploying the Behavioral 

Detection Officers now. I think it is important to also note that behavioral detection is still an important element, but it is how you 

use it effectively, I think, that matters. 

So, I can use those officers directly at things like documentchecking positions, to serve as divest officers, places where they 

can still monitor and look at behavior, but at the same time, directly contribute to the efficiency of the checkpoint. 

Chairman MCCAUL. Finally, do you support the concept of expanding TSA’s PreCheck program, which I think would move a lot 

of people in the long lines into the PreCheck lines, which I think 

would solve many of these problems as well. 

Admiral NEFFENGER. Absolutely. In fact, that is one of my fundamental priorities is to dramatically expand the PreCheck population and dramatically expand the capability to enroll people in 

PreCheck. 

Chairman MCCAUL. Sir, I know they are putting a lot of blame 

on you for this crisis, but we passed a bill out of this committee 

to expand the TSA PreCheck program, which would have helped 

this situation, and yet it is sitting there in the Senate, stalled in 

the Senate. 

They could have helped this problem months ago, and it is unconscionable that the Senate hasn’t acted on this. I call upon the 

Senate. Sometimes they don’t listen to us in the House. But for the 

sake of the American people, it is time for the Senate to act on this 

important legislation. 

With that, I now recognize the Ranking Member. 

Mr. THOMPSON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Cedric, put the chart 

up. I have a chart that kind of crystallizes what I think is the challenge that TSA is faced with. 

In fiscal year 2011, we had 45,000 TSOs, 642 million passengers; 

fiscal year 2016, we have 740 million passengers and only 42,500 

TSOs. 

I guess the question that comes to mind, what do you think the 

number of TSOs you need to address the problem we are faced with 

now? 

Admiral NEFFENGER. Well, thank you for the question. I do think 

that we are at a lower staffing level than we need to be to meet 

peak demands at peak periods, and we are working the staffing 

models now aggressively with the airlines to determine the right 

number. We are also looking to see what kinds of efficiencies we 

can gain in just the way we deploy people. 

So we found in Chicago, for instance, that we converted 100 parttimers to full time. That is an instant gain of a workforce. We are 

using overtime hours to effectively convert additional part-timers to 

full time. We added—we are adding a total of 250 officers over the 

summer, 58 right now. 

That in conjunction with some operational adjustments we have 

made have dramatically improved the situation in Chicago. 

So we—I think that—I don’t have an exact number for you right 

now because we are reworking our staffing models completely to 

14 

look at the way in which the airlines do it, but I do know that we 

need a higher staffing level than we currently have. 

Mr. THOMPSON. I look forward to you coming up with the number. Do you have, presently, the resources to address the problems 

of wait time and other things presently within your budget? 

Admiral NEFFENGER. The reprogramming request has helped 

considerably, because it has allowed me to immediately put resources. Right now, the most effective approach is to get part-time 

to full-time, so that I can get trained people working longer hours 

who want to work longer hours, who would like to be full-time. 

That reduces my attrition rate, so it increases my ability to avoid 

churn. Then it allows me to redeploy some of my canine teams to 

the airports of highest need. 

That addresses the problem in the top airports, but I don’t want 

to see the problem cascade across the system, which is why we are 

looking at the potential for whether a second reprogramming request is needed to hire additional. 

Mr. THOMPSON. Thank you. Some people are saying that the wait 

time has increased substantially after the airlines implemented 

baggage fees, and that people, rather than paying the fees, are taking their additional baggage onto the planes to avoid the cost. 

Therefore, the wait time getting to the plane increases because 

of the increase in baggage. Have you all looked at that as an issue? 

Admiral NEFFENGER. Well, I will tell you, we see about 4 times 

the number of baggage coming to the checkpoint than get checked. 

Volume at the checkpoint, you know, the volume of carry-on bags 

is—puts a lot of pressure on checkpoint operations. 

So we have been working aggressively with the airlines to first 

enforce the 1+1 rule. We think that is very important, because if 

you bring 4 things through the checkpoint, a couple of those things 

are probably going to get gate-checked, anyhow. 

Mr. THOMPSON. Well, you know, I think one thing we ought to 

look at as a committee, the airlines are making several billion dollars annually off those fees. If that has contributed to the wait 

times and additional things, I think we ought to look and see if 

they can make a contribution toward this effort to alleviate the 

wait times. I think that is a reasonable thing for us to look at, and 

I look forward to this committee looking at that as a possibility. 

I was glad to hear your analysis of the BDOs. There has been 

a lot of comment and criticism, quite frankly, about their use. So 

now if they are being deployed to address this crisis, I compliment 

you on doing that. 

With this wait-time issue where we are, can you tell me what the 

airlines are doing to help address this problem as far as TSA is 

concerned? 

Admiral NEFFENGER. Yes, I have been very pleased with the— 

with what the airlines have been aggressively doing lately. So, 

quite a few of the airlines have been hiring contract staff to take 

nonsecurity duties, everything from sitting at the exit lanes—that 

frees up a TSO to get back on a checkpoint; providing people to run 

the bins from one end of the line back to the beginning of the line. 

Doing what is called divest officer duties. That is the individual 

who reminds people to take off their shoes and their belt and so 

forth. It turns out that is a pretty important position because a lot 

15 

of people forget to do it and that can slow things down if you don’t 

have—if you are not prepared by the time you get there. 

So that has been very helpful. They are also providing people out 

in front of the checkpoints to direct people to other checkpoints. 

What we find is that oftentimes, you will have, particularly in airports where you have limited, you know, limited physical space in 

which to operate, you have multiple small checkpoints that you 

can’t see from one to the other. Sometimes you will get a big line 

in one and they will be nobody in the next. 

But human psychology is such that once you are in a line, you 

don’t want to leave that line to go to another one because you 

might be—you might find yourself in a longer one. So catching 

them before they get in line is important. 

Finally, the other thing they are helping us do with the huge increase in enrollments that we have seen in PreCheck, we have a 

lot of people who still walk into a standard line not recognizing 

that that is not going to be an automatic PreCheck lane. So you 

have got to scrub the standard lines to pull people out. As many 

as 15 percent of the daily passengers we are finding are walking 

into a standard lane by mistake and you have got to get them out 

of there. 

So the airlines have been very helpful in that respect. 

Mr. THOMPSON. Thank you. 

I yield back, Mr. Chair. 

Chairman MCCAUL. I thank the Ranking Member. 

The Chair recognizes Mr. King, from New York. 

Mr. KING. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Thank you, Admiral, for your testimony here today and for your 

service. 

In New York, my understanding is that at JFK Airport, there is 

an 82 percent increase in the maximum time between 2015 to 

2016. Whether that is 82 or 72, it is still extraordinarily high. 

Can you quantify what impact you expect from the additional 

new officers you are going to be sending there? In other words, will 

that 82 become 72, 52? Is there any way you can make the equivalency between the additions and subtractions? 

Admiral NEFFENGER. Yes, I don’t know if I can put a percentage 

on it right now for you. But I can tell you we are already seeing 

a dramatic improvement at JFK. For example, yesterday the maximum line-wait we saw, and it was just a spike—was 39 minutes 

in a standard lane. The maximum time we saw in a PreCheck lane 

was 5 minutes. 

So we are already seeing a dramatic improvement there. We 

have watched that very carefully. We want to make sure that we 

see that every day. You had a very high volume coming through 

at JFK yesterday. 

Mr. KING. Is that because of increased personnel or because you 

changed your methods? 

Admiral NEFFENGER. It is a combination of changing in some 

operational procedures, so using the personnel more effectively. 

One of the things that this National incident approach, this National approach to it allows us to do is rapidly move good ideas 

around the system. 

16 

It is also the combination of some new personnel coming in, shifting some dog teams there. Dog teams help considerably in terms 

of moving passengers. 

Mr. KING. Again, if we can try to quantify. Your original goal 

was 25 million for PreCheck. 

Admiral NEFFENGER. Right. 

Mr. KING. There are 9 or 10 right now. 

If you got to 25, what impact would that have? 

Admiral NEFFENGER. Well, I think it could dramatically transform the system because then you would have many, many lanes 

open. That would represent roughly 50 percent of the daily traveling volume if you got to 25 million people. You could keep many 

more lanes open in PreCheck. You could run the dogs more effectively in the locations where you still had high volume, but it 

would be on a smaller crowd of people. 

So if we can continue to grow that population, I think that is the 

way. The other thing it does for me is it gives me a trusted—a 

known population. That is much more important, particularly in today’s world. 

Mr. KING. The Chairman mentioned Egypt Airlines, and maybe 

this is slightly off-topic, but he also mentioned the insider threat. 

Can you just say what you are doing on that? I know last year 

there was the IG report. It just so happens, the Chairman mentioned Charles de Gaulle Airport where they had to get rid of 85 

personnel. 

We have almost a million people behind the scenes that are insiders. How effective is our vetting process for them? 

Admiral NEFFENGER. Well, I think it is far more effective this 

year than it was even last year. So we have—we screen. We have 

always screened everybody. There are about—as you said, just 

under a million people who hold badged access of some type to an 

airport. It is not universal badged access and there are varying levels of access. 

Each one of those individuals is continuously vetted against the 

terrorist screening database. Since the—since December of this 

year, we now have full access to the so-called TIDE categories. This 

is the extended database of interest that doesn’t necessarily indicate that you are connected to a known or suspected terrorist, but 

there may be indicators. We now do recurrent vetting against that 

as well. 

We are piloting a project with Delta Airlines in 2 large airports 

to do now recurrent vetting against criminal databases, the socalled FBI Rap Pack program. The current requirement is every 2 

years. I want that to be recurrent as well. Assuming that goes well, 

then we will implement that full-time by the end of the calendar 

year and that will be continuous vetting against the criminal databases as well. 

Mr. KING. So are there training procedures in place for cooperation between the TSA personnel and the armed police at the airports? Because TSA obviously is not armed. They can’t make arrests. If they do spot something, how quick is the time response 

with the police officers? 

Admiral NEFFENGER. Well, it can vary by airport, but it is—but 

we have got duress alarms at every checkpoint on every single lane 

17 

of every checkpoint in the Nation. We completed the installation of 

those just before the end of the calendar year. We train every day 

with police departments. 

In fact, I just met with the Association of Law Enforcement Officers at their annual conference and we—and one of the topics was 

a discussion for consistent training across. It is everything from active-shooter training to response to emergencies, to clearing contraband items that are discovered at the checkpoint. 

But I think we have a very good relationship, particularly in the 

largest airports where the potential for greatest concern can be. 

Mr. KING. When you have nothing else to do, if you would do me 

a favor and just check out what the relationship is between TSA 

and the Port Authority police of New York and New Jersey. 

Admiral NEFFENGER. Yes, sir, I will. 

Mr. KING. Thank you very much. 

I yield back. 

Chairman MCCAUL. The Chair recognizes Ms. Sheila Jackson 

Lee. 

Ms. JACKSON LEE. I thank the Chairman and the Ranking Member for this hearing. 

Admiral, thank you again for your service. I have often said in 

this committee and said to TSOs and others that the Transportation Security Administration are the first responders of aviation 

security. I believe that is important to convey to your management, 

to you and to certainly the line officers, supervisors, and others 

who go out every day to do this great work. 

I also want to acknowledge the Chairman and Ranking Member 

of this committee because they have led an enormously bipartisan 

committee that only focus, or main focus is the security of the Nation. This makes this a pleasant experience because we are committed to getting the job done, if you will. We want to get the job 

done with you. 

So, I want to emphasize a thought that it is difficult to call yourself the reprogram government. It is hard to reprogram for infectious diseases. It is hard to reprogram for military. It is hard to 

reprogram for the security of the Nation, particularly in aviation 

security. 

So, I understand that we may be getting 700 TSOs coming this 

summer. I want to follow the line of questioning that our Ranking 

Member had with this particular graph here. It is stark between 

2011 and fiscal year 2016, particularly with the increase in travelers. I think we might even get more. 

So can you—I understand we may be getting 700. I understand 

that we may be getting at a point 1,600, and then 2,500. Can you 

put that in perspective of when these numbers will come to add to 

the TSOs? 

Admiral NEFFENGER. Yes, ma’am. The 768 that we are hiring 

right now should all be on board by June 15. So we are hiring them 

now. So they are rolling into the system. But we should have them 

all trained and on board by June 15. 

Ms. JACKSON LEE. June 15. 

Admiral NEFFENGER. That is right. Then they will add to that. 

That is in addition to the normal hiring that we are already doing. 

18 

So that is on top of the 200 new officers a week that we are putting 

out of training currently. 

Ms. JACKSON LEE. So is that fiscal year 2016, can we expect 

1,600 and then 2,500? Do I have these numbers—— 

Admiral NEFFENGER. Well, the 1,600 was the number I was 

scheduled to lose in fiscal year 2016. So Congress allowed me to 

keep that number. So, we had already—— 

Ms. JACKSON LEE. That is somewhat of a plus, but you didn’t 

lose them. So that 1,600—— 

Admiral NEFFENGER. We just didn’t lose them. Yes, ma’am. 

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Then what is the—— 

Admiral NEFFENGER. So this 768 is a plus on top of that 1,600 

that we would have lost. We had already cut some into that number to meet the fiscal year 2016 targets, we had to hire back some 

of those. 

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Does that make the 2,500 additional or—obviously 16 and 7 is 23. But what do you think you are going to get 

in fiscal year 2016? 

Admiral NEFFENGER. Well, I think we will keep the 1,600, plus 

the 768 on top of that. So that gives us roughly the 23—2,400 or 

so. 

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Does that include the potential reassignment, 

redeploying of BDOs which I think is an excellent idea, particularly 

having them be at a point where they can assess—a stationary 

point—where they can assess almost every individual that comes 

through. 

Admiral NEFFENGER. No, that gives me additional capability on 

that of that. That is a real capability right now. We are moving 

those in right now and then the conversion of part-time to fulltime. 

As you know, we have quite a few part-timers that would love 

to be full time. But eventually they can’t wait long enough for a 

full-time position to open so we lose them. So we have a high attrition rate in our part-time workers. 

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Let me ask a series of questions, I congratulate you on FLETC. One of my concerns is training, training not 

only the new recruits but training the existing TSOs. 

That ties into the numbers that we reflected on dealing with accuracy, I will just make that general point. I would be interested 

in your work on accuracy and also on the training. I would hope 

that we could actively engage in training ex-military, and I indicated some time ago college recruits. I would like you to comment 

on that. 

The last question is Chicago was the epicenter; everybody’s eyes 

were on Chicago besides Arizona and the equipment failure. If you 

can finish your questions by saying what is the appointed and immediate response to Chicago? Which is an example of what other 

cities are facing. 

Admiral NEFFENGER. So immediately in Chicago and this is— 

when I talk about Chicago, understand we are also doing the same 

thing at the other top airports because, well, Chicago was a preventable incident, in my opinion. 

19 

When you look at what happened, this was a surge that was anticipated, it was known. It was a failure to get some things done 

in advance of that. We have proved that by fixing it pretty quickly. 

So in Chicago, among other things, we had already planned to 

put additional officers in there. So of that 768, 58 of those individuals are coming into Chicago by the end of this week. There will 

be a total of 58 new. 

We converted 100 of our part-time officers to full-time officers 

and we pushed a lot of overtime hours there so that they can use 

overtime hours. You have to be careful with overtime; you don’t 

want to burn up your full-time workforce but it is very effective at 

taking part-timers and giving them more hours and many of them 

want those. 

We also moved some additional K–9s; these were K–9 teams that 

we had planned to be moving. We just accelerated their move into 

Chicago. The total of that has resulted in a significant change in 

the Chicago picture. 

The Chicago Tribune reported in today’s paper that the longest 

wait time was 15 minutes yesterday and that was with significantly higher volume. So it tells me that with some targeted additional resources, efficient use of those resources and then a management team that understands how to run that daily tactical operation, you can make a big difference. 

That is what we are doing at each of the big airports, right now. 

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Recruitment? 

Admiral NEFFENGER. Recruitment, fortunately, right now we do 

not seem to have trouble meeting our recruiting targets. We have 

large pool of people that have been pre-vetted. That is why we were 

able to rapidly begin to hire that 768 because we had a large pool 

of available applicants that had been screened that were looking 

for work. 

I still want to work on bringing more of that back in-house than 

is currently done. As you know, we work through a private contractor to do our hiring and recruiting right now. 

Ms. JACKSON LEE. I will get your other answers in writing regarding the institute that—in Georgia, FLETC about how you can 

utilize that better. Let me just conclude by thanking the TSOs all 

across America for the great service that they do for this Nation. 

I yield back. 

Chairman MCCAUL. The Chair now recognizes Mr. Rogers, from 

Alabama. 

Mr. ROGERS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Admiral, thank you for being here and for your service to our 

country. I think you are a good man, a competent man who has 

been given an impossible task to administer the TSA. 

The TSA has wallowed in its own bureaucracy for more than a 

decade. Over that period of time, it has built up a lot of bad habits 

that have come to fester. You spoke in your opening statement 

about making the TSA a more responsive organization, leaner and 

smarter. I want to help you do that. 

To that end, I plan to introduce legislation to transform TSA 

from an H.R. not-merit to a security-focused organization by reforming and greatly expanding the Screening Partnership Program. 

Having worked on these issues for more than a decade, I have seen 

20 

that TSA can do a mission when it is given a clear succinct mission. 

My bill is going to allow more airports to hire private contractors 

capable of managing day-to-day operations and make TSA the driving force to oversee intelligence-based security strategies. These 

changes will get more out of your organization than any summerrushed Band-Aid bill could ever do. 

You can spend your time conducting covert testing and building 

effective strategies instead of trying to decide who is going to work 

the morning shift at Reagan Airport. To the end, I want to talk to 

you about the SPP Program. 

Last year, the GAO determined that TSA is not fairly comparing 

the cost of Government-run screening operations with their privately-run SPP counterparts. In November, I requested TSA release more accurate cost data to Congress and GAO. Your agency 

promised to deliver that information within 6 months, but it never 

came. 

In March, I asked you personally for the data during a budget 

hearing and then sent you a letter to remind you of that. It still 

hasn’t showed up. It has been 191 days since I requested that information. 

Can you tell me when I am going to receive the accurate cost 

comparison that GAO says we need to get? 

Admiral NEFFENGER. Yes, sir. As you know, I agreed with GAO 

that we usually do a better job. GAO set a deadline for us of the 

end of June. We are working very closely with them in order to 

meet that deadline. 

We are on target to meet that deadline. We have been meeting 

with GAO regularly to ensure that they concur with what we are 

finding and that it meets the recommendation they made, as well 

as an accurate accounting of the costs because I need the same 

thing. 

Mr. ROGERS. By the end of June I can count on seeing that? 

Admiral NEFFENGER. Yes sir, we are on target to meet that deadline. 

Mr. ROGERS. Excellent. 

Next, you talked about the K–9 screening programs. You know 

I am a big fan of that technology. I believe it is the most effective 

that we have in our toolbox. 

But I went out to Lackland a couple months ago; I have been out 

there several times. But I was looking at some of the training they 

are doing, what you all refer to as passenger screening K–9s. 

That has been held out by TSA to me as being the same as Vapor 

Wake K–9s. In fact, what I saw was nothing comparable to Vapor 

Wake K–9s. They were training K–9s to basically work the lines 

at an airport. Which means you have to go up to the passenger, the 

K–9 has to go either smell them personally or right at them. 

As you know from Vapor Wake K–9s technology, which we use 

over here at the Capitol, used over at Union Station, is used at the 

Grand Central Station in New York, many places. The K–9 doesn’t 

have to come close to the passenger. 

They can just detect the air for up to 15 or 20 minutes after a 

passenger has disturbed it. Can you tell me why that technology 

21 

is being trained at Lackland in that more narrow scope instead of 

the more effective Vapor Wake training? 

Admiral NEFFENGER. Well, I will get you a fuller answer for the 

record but here is how I understand it. I have cautioned that I am 

speaking without the benefit of an expert next to me. 

When you look at a passenger screening line, it is a slightly different dynamic because you have got an enclosed line of people. So 

as I watch those dogs operate, what they are doing is—if you notice 

they are moving their head around a lot because they are checking 

for vapor. 

We typically put enclosed panels next to the stanchions where 

possible, or enclose the checkpoint behind a panel. So the dog is 

doing two things, it is both checking the vapor as somebody goes 

by them but it is also sniffing the general vapor in the air. 

My understanding is they had to modify it somewhat for the very 

specific nature of the way people line up in queues. But let me get 

you a better, more complete answer to that. 

Mr. ROGERS. Yes, as you know—that is fine. That is much better 

than doing nothing and it is much better than the equipment we 

use. But as you know, you can put these assets out in a foyer area 

before people even get to the line. 

They can detect the air that has been disturbed by somebody 

who has walked by in the recent 15 or 20 minutes without having 

to come up to the person. That is a very valuable deterrent. Also 

putting them past the checkpoint, in case the machine doesn’t detect something. 

These again, are assets that don’t have to come up to the person. 

Unfortunately, for some people it is uncomfortable to a dog come 

up and smell them. Wouldn’t bother me, I am from Alabama. But 

now, some folks would be bothered by it. 

With that, I yield back, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman MCCAUL. Thank you. 

The Chair recognizes Mr. Langevin. 

Mr. LANGEVIN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to thank you 

and the Ranking Member for holding this very important hearing. 

Admiral, thank you for your testimony and for your service to 

our country. 

I agree with my colleague that you have an impossible task on 

your hands, but an important one. Clearly, the wait times at airports that the traveling public are having to deal with are unacceptable. Certainly, my constituents and people around the country 

are demanding quicker lines. I know that is our goal. 

One of the priorities that you and Secretary Johnson laid out as 

part of your 10-point plan is doubling down on R&D at TSA. I appreciate the promise of new technology to expedite screening, but 

can you preview some of what we can expect? 

Admiral NEFFENGER. Well, thanks for that. I do think we need 

to do a better job of both research, development, and incentivizing 

the private sector to come forward with ideas. But here is an example I think of what we can see. 

If you look at the Atlanta Airport today, we just—we opened 2 

new automated screening lanes down there. This is not something 

new. It has been in use in Europe for a number of years. But these 

are—if you think about a standard lane, you walk up to a lane and 

22 

there is a table there. You put your stuff up on the table and you 

slide it along the table until you can engage the conveyor belt. 

This is a fully automated system. The bin returns automatically. 

It has got an RFID tag and a bar code that ties it directly to you. 

It takes—there is a photograph taken of your stuff as well as an 

X-ray. It takes off automatically. There are 5 stations at which people can line up, so you don’t have to go single file. You can take 

5 people at a time up to the checkpoint. They cycle in as they fill 

their bins up, and it goes through. 

London Heathrow has said that they have seen on average anywhere from a 20 to 25 percent increase in throughput at the same 

level of effectiveness. So we are very excited about that. I think 

that as you look at increasing passenger volumes, at some point 

you reach capacity with a manual system. And then you have to 

look to automate things. I think that TSA needs to work closely 

with the system to get it more automated and to bring more technology in. 

Mr. LANGEVIN. Can I ask you—on that point, on the automated 

part, just so I am clear. So, that part is automated, but there is 

still a human—a person in the loop actually looking at what is in 

the carry-on baggage that is being screened? 

Admiral NEFFENGER. There is still somebody reading an X-ray 

right now. We are also working with software companies to determine how effective machines can become at identifying prohibited 

items, so that you can put humans into the work that humans do 

best, while at the same time, you know, moving machines out to 

what they do best. 

We are also looking at changing the way we do identity matching. I look at—when I look around an airport and I see all those 

kiosks that distribute boarding passes, there is typically some type 

of an ID reader on all of those. If you can get ID-reading technology 

into there, there are things we can do that can, you know, automate the identity check process as well. 

Mr. LANGEVIN. So, let me shift over to one other thing. I may 

come back to technology in a minute. But so, TSA has publicly stated its goal for PreCheck as having 25 million enrollees. I know my 

colleague, Mr. King, asked about the enrollees in the PreCheck system and what that would mean if we actually had 25 million. 

But right now, currently TSA only has 2.76 million people enrolled. What is TSA’s plan for expanding PreCheck to further reach 

that goal of 25 million enrollees? 

Admiral NEFFENGER. I just want to clarify. The 25 million is all 

trusted travelers. So that would include Global Entry, Nexus, and 

Sentri. Right now, we are at about 9.5 million of total trusted travelers. These are people who have enrolled in some program of the 

Federal Government. 

So there are a couple of things we need to do. First of all is to 

expand the enrollment opportunities. I don’t think we have enough 

enrollment centers out there. We are working with—we currently 

have one vendor that provides the contract enrollment services. We 

are hoping to expand that this year to additional vendors under a 

new contract. 

The second thing is to make those centers more available to do 

more mobile enrollment, to streamline even further the application 

23 

process. We do have an on-line application process, but you still 

have to show up to do your fingerprints. And then we are working 

with airlines and traveler reward programs. Many of the airlines 

are now offering mile redemption for PreCheck. Microsoft Corporation recently bought PreCheck for all of its travelers. And many of 

the travel reward programs are providing the ability to trade in 

your miles or points for PreCheck. 

Mr. LANGEVIN. So, currently to enroll in PreCheck, the individual 

has to pay a fee of $85 to be enrolled for 5 years. However, for 

those that fly once or twice a year, this may not be feasible or practical, and could distract from TSA’s efforts to broaden enrollment. 

Has TSA thought of any alternatives to paying $85 for 

PreCheck? Can you detail any thoughts on that? 

Admiral NEFFENGER. Well, most of those fees go directly to cover 

program costs right now. So it is—it would be challenging to, under 

the existing contract, to change the fee structure. That is why we 

encourage people to look at their—if they are members of trusted 

traveler programs of some sort, then there are opportunities being 

offered through various programs to get direct reimbursement or 

direct vouchers for PreCheck. 

Mr. LANGEVIN. I know my time is expired. I just, if you could on 

a follow-up or perhaps in writing, going back to the technology 

issue. In deploying new screening technology, I wonder how we can 

ensure that we avoid the mistakes of AIT. 

So, I know my time is expired, but I will yield back. 

Chairman MCCAUL. The Chair recognizes Mr. Perry. 

Mr. PERRY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Good to see you, Admiral. 

Let’s talk about bonuses a little bit. TSA requested almost $80 

million for bonuses and performance rewards for fiscal year 2017. 

As I am sure you are aware, it has been revealed that the assistant 

administrator received almost $90,000 in bonuses over a 13-month 

period. 

So, let’s just start with this, what do you do to get a bonus? What 

do you do? What did the assistant administrator do to receive 

$90,000 in just bonus, right? I don’t know what the rate is for an 

inspector, but at least one, right? You could hire one with the 

bonus. 

What I think most of the American people view as a historic critical failure right now, looking at the lines and the throughput. I 

wonder what you have got to do to get a bonus at TSA. I think they 

are wondering what we have got to do. 

Admiral NEFFENGER. Well, I wasn’t here then, as you know. 

When I discovered that, in my opinion, that is completely unjustifiable. I think it is appropriate to have the ability to reward good 

performers in any line of business. 

Mr. PERRY. Sure. 

Admiral NEFFENGER. So, my belief is first of all, you follow existing policy in OPM. So the first thing I did was eliminated the practice of multiple bonuses to any one individual. So I have dramatically changed that. My goal is to push more reward bonuses out to 

the people in the organization that do some of the real front-line 

work. 

24 

So I can’t justify the level of bonuses that were provided in the 

past. I can tell you I stopped that. I watch it very carefully. I put 

significant management controls on it, including requiring oversight by the Department of Homeland Security of anything. I don’t 

want anything happening inside TSA when it comes to bonuses to 

senior executives. 

Mr. PERRY. Okay, so the program does still exist. I think to a certain—— 

Admiral NEFFENGER. This is a program across the Federal Government. 

Mr. PERRY. Right, right. Do you know, how much was spent by 

TSA last fiscal year on bonuses? You know, I am trying to juxtapose that with the $34 million reprogramming for 768 inspectors, 

and just trying to get a—— 

Admiral NEFFENGER. I don’t have the number at the top of my 

head. I will get you the number for the record, sir, but I don’t have 

it off the top of my head. 

Mr. PERRY. All right. Well, thank you for that. 

Moving on, there was a GAO report regarding employee misconduct, specifically attendance and leave. One of the things they 

found that penalties for misconduct and failure to attend were 

lower than TSA’s own guidance and recommendations. 

Let me just ask you this, if you know, and if you have done any 

of your own studies: Do unexcused absences and tardiness create 

problems in staffing—in effectively staffing checkpoints? 

Admiral NEFFENGER. It can. It depends on the extent to which 

it happens. It depends on what the reasons are for it. But if you 

have significant numbers of unexpected—it will dramatically affect 

your ability to staff. 

Mr. PERRY. So, of course, that is directly correlated with increased wait times if folks aren’t there. Do you know if that is 

something that has impacted to the point that you are taking a 

look at that? 

Admiral NEFFENGER. We are taking a look at it. One of my concerns is that we understand if we don’t have staff in place when 

we expect to have them in place, what is the reason behind that? 

Did we inadvertently give people leave when we shouldn’t have 

given them leave? Or did they just not show up? If they didn’t show 

up, what would be the reason for that? 

That is all part of the calculus to determine, you know, how you 

are ready for a daily tactical operation. 

Mr. PERRY. Do you know what some of the disciplinary actions 

are for employees with unexcused absence or excessive tardiness? 

Do you know some of the actions you would take? Because the report said that the penalties for misconduct in the past have been 

lower than—generally lower than the guidance—than your own 

guidance by TSA. 

Admiral NEFFENGER. Well, you know, as I look at it, and I think 

back to my military experience, when you get guidance, sometimes 

that guidance will give you the maximum penalty allowable. You 

may or may not need to assign that. 

Mr. PERRY. Sure. 

25 

Admiral NEFFENGER. So I think it really is a case-by-case look. 

If you have got specific cases that you are interested in, I mean, 

I will be happy to take that for the record. 

But my opinion, as I said, there may be a valid reason why somebody doesn’t show up on time even if it caused you some real problems for them not showing up. Maybe they should have called, they 

didn’t call. So the level of discipline or punishment you give really 

is a case-by-case study. It is hard to give a blanket answer to that. 

Mr. PERRY. I understand. I was kind-of looking for a range there. 

You probably know that the subcommittee that I chair, we are conducting our investigation into the misconduct and of course, the 

penalties associated and potential correlation with increased wait 

times. We will be looking forward to working with you. 

Admiral NEFFENGER. No, same. I am very interested in this problem because I want to get to the root of management issues 

throughout the organization. 

Mr. PERRY. Appreciate your time. Thank you. Mr. Chairman, I 

yield back. 

Chairman MCCAUL. The Chair recognizes Mrs. Watson Coleman. 

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, 

Administrator Neffenger. 

Admiral NEFFENGER. Thank you. 

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN. You have an incredibly difficult job. I 

am glad that you are the one that is in it. I am very concerned 

about the wait times. I really do believe that the airlines, by allowing people to carry 2 and 3 bags instead of 1 bag when they are 

carrying one to the—on the aircraft, contributes to the wait and the 

amount of time it takes to go through the lines. 

I know you need additional resources and I am really interested 

in knowing, at some point, the answer to Mr. Thompson’s question 

about how many do you think that you need. I know that it is uneven sometimes in going through even the PreCheck lines where 

they are telling you take your shoes off and take your belt off. I 

am like, I thought that is why I was in PreCheck and I wouldn’t 

have to do that. So I am happy that you have an academy and that 

you are training people now. 

I want—and I have got an issue. I have got a question about this 

issue of partnerships. Because there have been a few instances 

where airports have threaten to privatize as an alternative to Federalized screeners, which I am more comfortable with, sir. 

There have also been articles and statements from those who believe that the SPP provides marginal, if any, benefit in terms of reducing wait times. Is there any measurable difference between the 

use of Screening Partnership Programs, versus Federalized screeners, or is the problem a resource problem that would be shared by 

TSA and private screeners alike? 

Could we be certain that they would be equally as concerned 

with the security measure as they would be with the convenience 

of getting through the lines quicker? 

Admiral NEFFENGER. Well thanks for the question. I—first, it is 

important to understand that even a private screening contractor 

works for the TSA. It is contracted to the Federal Government, contracted to TSA and it is a TSA management staff that runs that. 

I think that is important because, from my perspective, the NaVerDate Mar 15 2010 14:19 Feb 28, 2017 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00029 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 H:\THUMBDRIVE\114TH HEARINGS\16FL0525\HM146000.TXT HEATH
26 

tional security is a Federal function and you need National standards when it comes to that. 

In my mind, so when you look at performance, you know, it is 

roughly the same from a private—we train them to the same 

standards. In fact, they train at our TSA academy. 

From my perspective, the flexibility I get with a Federal workforce is—for this National deployment force, I mentioned, these are 

TSOs who have volunteered to be deployable in—for surge events 

and for others. But we have about 250 of those. I can do that with 

a Federal workforce. I can’t reach into a private workforce without 

working a contract issue. 

So if I need to surge, it gives me the ability to do that. I can also 

move personnel more rapidly from place to place as I need to. So 

from my perspective, that is a benefit as a manager of having a 

workforce that works directly for me versus contracted to me. 

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN. Thank you. You talked about the fact 

that there is only 1 vendor that you work with on the PreCheck 

program and that the $85 that one has to pay really only covers 

the administrative expenses. So when you are going to expand this 

opportunity to other vendors, do you think that that will create 

competition and reduce the cost associated with that? 

Admiral NEFFENGER. I really hope so. In fact, that was one of the 

things that we built into the request for proposal was to look for 

ways to reduce the fee. I think competition can do that. 

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN. Or if not reduce the fee, at least allow 

some of that fee to be used to ensure that you all have the resources you need to do the job that needs to be done. 

Admiral NEFFENGER. Right. I think—what we looked for were 

flexible options for how you would fund this and pay for it in a different way. 

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN. TSO employees, I know that the parttime employment is something that you really have a lot of turnover in because people need full-time jobs. But I would like to know 

how much an incoming TSO gets as a full-time employee. What is 

that salary? 

Admiral NEFFENGER. You know, I don’t want to get the number 

wrong off the top of my head. It depends upon location, obviously, 

because they get locality pay to try to make it equivalent. 

Let me get you the number for the record. It is—I want to say it is around $30,000. But let me get that number for the record. 

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN. Do you have a high turnover rate in the 

full-time employees? 

Admiral NEFFENGER. No, actually our full-time workforce is pretty stable. It runs between 8 and 9 percent. We get—but we have 

about a 25 percent turnover rate in the part-time workforce. 

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN. One of my colleagues mentioned the relationship you have with the police. I think it was Mr. King particularly singling out the port authority police of New York and 

New Jersey. I had meetings with them and they tell me that there 

is like one police officer assigned to a terminal. 

Do you find that there is enough police capacity and support in 

the terminals? 

Admiral NEFFENGER. Well, we have been—I have been looking at 

that pretty hard. As I travel around I meet with the various law 

27 

enforcement agencies that work in the airports. Some have more 

capacity than others. There is no doubt about that. 

But I am finding in the large airports that for the most part, 

they understand their mission, they take it very seriously. They are 

working in the public areas of the airport. They also—we also have 

a reimbursement program, as you know, which reimburses them 

for the time that they spend in and around the checkpoints. As I 

said, we have put duress alarms into every single checkpoint in the 

country to ensure that there is a—as rapid a response as possible. 

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN. Mr. Neffenger I just need you to know 

that I agree that you have got an extremely important job to do. 

For me, I don’t care sometimes about being inconvenient. I want 

to get on an airplane and know I am going to get there safely. I 

appreciate what you have to contend with. 

I just want to make sure that I understand what you need so 

that I can fight for what you need to make sure that we are safe 

and that your agency has the resources it needs. 

Admiral NEFFENGER. Yes, ma’am. 

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN. Thank you very much. I yield back. 

Chairman MCCAUL. Chair recognizes the Chairman of the Subcommittee on Transportation Security and Infrastructure Protection, Mr. Katko. 

Mr. KATKO. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Sir, Neffenger—good 

morning, and I want to state preliminarily, I appreciate the collaborative effort we are working on with my subcommittee. In fact, 

we met for an hour-and-a-half the other day at your offices and I 

appreciate the frank discussions and the give and take and your 

commitment to trying to get things done and putting politics aside 

and I appreciate that. 

But something kind of piqued my curiosity when we were talking 

today and that is the fees surrounding PreCheck. There is a 

PreCheck bill sitting over in the Senate now that is wait—ostensibly because they want—the Senate wants the fees to go to general treasury that are generated from the PreCheck fee. 

So I want to talk about those fees a second. Tell me, what does 

that $85 go towards? 

Admiral NEFFENGER. As I said, it primarily covers the full program cost. So there is a component that pays the FBI—reimburses 

the FBI for the background checks that they do. That is a fixed fee 

that the FBI charges to conduct the background checks. 

There is a component of the fee that covers TSA’s administrative 

costs because it is a self-funding program. So it pays for the overhead and the staff and the administrative staff to do that. Then the 

bulk of the fee then goes to the vendor to cover their costs, both 

for the physical enrollment centers and their personnel. 

Mr. KATKO. Okay. So if that $85 was taken away and gone—goes 

right to the general treasury, who would pay for all those costs? 

Would it be TSA? Would it not? 

Admiral NEFFENGER. Well, we would have to find the money 

someplace. 

Mr. KATKO. Okay. So let’s say—so $85—$85 is in fact the cost, and you want to enroll 10 million more people, that means $850 

million you would have to find somewhere else in your budget, is 

that right? 

28 

Admiral NEFFENGER. That is right. Yes, sir. 

Mr. KATKO. It is kind of insane, isn’t it, if you think of that? 

Admiral NEFFENGER. Well I like self-funded programs. 

Mr. KATKO. Okay. So the bottom line—there is a bill that is sitting over in the Senate. I just want to make sure I understand it. 

It directs TSA to partner more closely with the private sector and 

have basically competition, if you will, in the PreCheck program. 

That would help drive cost down. That is a goal of it. 

So with that being said, do you believe that that bill would help 

you achieve the higher numbers with PreCheck? 

Admiral NEFFENGER. Well you know, what that bill does is codify 

what we are trying to do right now, which is to increase competition in the private sector with the hope of that competition driving 

the cost down. 

Mr. KATKO. Okay. All right, good enough. Now with respect to— 

I want to talk to you just for a second about the bonuses that were 

given out. Is there a system at TSA that—whereby subordinates 

can nominate superiors for bonuses or put them in for bonuses? 

Admiral NEFFENGER. Apparently there was a system that allowed that. That system doesn’t exist under my leadership. 

Mr. KATKO. So you have stopped that. 

Admiral NEFFENGER. I absolutely have. Yes. 

Mr. KATKO. Okay, there was a system, you stopped that and I 

commend you for doing that. That seems incongruous to me. It just 

doesn’t—I don’t understand how—— 

Admiral NEFFENGER. No I—right now, it requires approval by me 

and then seconding by the Department for any bonuses awarded to 

senior executives. 

Mr. KATKO. Okay. If I may switch gears one more time because 

I know you have talked a lot of different topics, so I want to expand 

a little bit here. ICAO was the international organization that basically certifies a minimum level of competence for airports. Is that 

correct? 

Admiral NEFFENGER. That is correct. 

Mr. KATKO. Do you rely on—once somebody hits the ICAO level, 

that is it and that is all you care about? 

Admiral NEFFENGER. Well, as you know, we are signatory to the 

ICAO treaty and that sets a standard around the world for security. From my perspective, I think you have to continuously pay attention to these standards and try to drive them up even higher. 

In fact I just—I recently met with the ICAO counsel in Montreal. 

As you know, there was a general assembly this year and I pushed 

for an aggressive security agenda at the general assembly and we 

tend to continue to drive that. 

In advance of that, we are—we look at every place that services 

the United States directly and we put a significant additional requirements in place to insure that we are comfortable with the 

screening and overview standards that they are using. 

Mr. KATKO. Okay. So I just want to ask a couple things about 

that. With respect to these last-point-of-departure airports, LPDs, 

you know we have a bill that has been submitted. It is over in the 

Senate now waiting approval. That is why I am interested in this 

area a little bit. 

29 

How important are these LPDs to have body scanners at the airports? 

Admiral NEFFENGER. Well, I think—body scanners may be the 

right answer depending on where you are looking. What I am most 

concerned with, are they effectively screening? I can understand 

why some places might not have a full body scanner. But if they 

don’t have one then they have to have some other things in place 

to be equivalent to that. 

So you can do that by full-body pat-downs, you can do that by 

explosive trace detection. There are lots of other means to do that. 

Mr. KATKO. Is explosive trace detection equipment important to 

have at these airports? 

Admiral NEFFENGER. Again, if—we like to see that. We have 

been working with ICAO and other foreign partners to push that 

type of equipment out. In the absence of that, then I want to see 

some very stringent additional requirements that would make up 

for the lack of that as we try to build that capacity. 

Mr. KATKO. How about document verification machines to authenticate documents that are coming through? Are they important 

as well? Same answer? 

Admiral NEFFENGER. Well that is important to me. If somebody 

is flying to the United States, I want to know who they are. 

Mr. KATKO. Okay. So if you had an airport that didn’t have body 

scanners and didn’t have explosive trace detection equipment, 

didn’t have document verification machines, and had troublesome, 

if not incompetent, K–9 teams, would those types of airports that 

have those things lacking, would they be a cause of concern to you? 

Admiral NEFFENGER. I would pay very close attention to airports 

like that. I want to be sure that they meet appropriate standards 

for us. 

Mr. KATKO. Okay. Last thing I will ask about this—I apologize, 

Mr. Chairman—and that is the personnel at those airports, is it 

important for you to know how those personnel are trained and 

whether or not they are giving adequate security background 

checks? 

Admiral NEFFENGER. That is part of what we try to verify when 

we go into foreign last points of departure to determine: Are they 

meeting standards that are appropriate for us to fly into this country? 

Mr. KATKO. Thank you very much. I yield back. 

Chairman MCCAUL. Chair recognizes Mr. Payne. 

Mr. PAYNE. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Ranking Member. Administrator Neffenger, you have a very difficult job here. I just want you 

to know that a lot of us appreciate your efforts in making sure that 

the final checkpoint before our citizens get on to airplanes are safe, 

along with the TSOs. 

You indicated that the TSOs with the behavioral detection training are being integrated into a checkpoint as document checkers. 

You also said that the FSDs have been granted unprecedented 

flexibility. Would you have a problem with the FSDs using a BDO 

for a checkpoint screening yourself? 

Admiral NEFFENGER. If they determine that that is their highest 

need at that moment, I have no problem with that. They have that 

authority to do that. 

30 

Mr. PAYNE. Okay. In April the FAA announced that they would 

be redesignating Newark Liberty International Airport, which is in 

my district, as a level 2 slot-controlled airport starting in October, 

potentially increasing the number of flights arriving and departing 

from the hub. 

How is TSA prepared to deal with the increased air traffic and 

the larger number of passengers that will come in with this designation? I know there have been great efforts over the past week 

to alleviate some of the time in Newark. We appreciate you looking 

at that and trying to be helpful as possible. 

But if this comes in October, naturally, you know, what we have 

done to this point will need to be reevaluated and looked at again. 

I know several TSOs are coming on-line as well as we move forward. 

But what would you do to take a look at that, knowing that this 

is going to change? 

Admiral NEFFENGER. Yes, sir, and in fact, what—this increased 

collaboration with the airlines and the airports is helping us to 

foresee problems like this in a way that we hadn’t in the past. I 

don’t want to get caught by surprise by something like that. Because, as you say, if you increase flights dramatically, you have 

got—we have got to be prepared to receive those. 

So we have been working very closely with the airlines and that 

airport to understand what that might look like, when we think we 

will begin to see that so we can get well in advance of that. I know 

that a couple of the major airlines there are already considering 

some things that they might do with respect to increased automation at the checkpoint, increasing the availability of checkpoint 

lanes. We are pushing resources into Newark and we will continue 

to do so. 

Mr. PAYNE. We had an incredible subcommittee hearing that Mr. 

Katko chaired just the other day where we had several of the airports come in and really share with us and I think, with the Chairman there and Mr. Katko, heard a willingness to try to work with 

TSA on these issues. They were quite a few major airports and 

hubs that were here to speak. So moving forward, we would like 

to continue to get that collaboration—— 

Admiral NEFFENGER. Yes, sir. 

Mr. PAYNE [continuing]. That we think that might not have been 

there to this point. Or not to the level that it needs to be. Let me 

just say also, I have been echoing this every opportunity that I 

have gotten the past several days, we really need to look at our 

TSOs and see what the compensation level is for them. 

They have a very important job. They are the last line of defense 

for some catastrophic situation to happen. You know, I don’t know 

how many people can raise a family, you know, on what we might 

think is $30,000 in this country. 

So we need to even look at the compensation of the TSOs. Understanding that they have a thankless job, first of all. They are on 

the front lines. They should be compensated in a manner of which 

the importance of their job is. Thank you. 

Admiral NEFFENGER. I would agree. 

Chairman MCCAUL. Chair recognizes Ms. McSally. 

31 

Ms. MCSALLY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, Admiral 

Neffenger. At the beginning of your testimony you said your first 

point of focus is a focus on the mission. I pulled up your mission 

statement for TSA and it says, ‘‘protect the Nation’s transportation 

systems to ensure freedom of movement for people and commerce.’’ 

I have been reading reports that your agents in the midst of the 

crisis of making sure in the increasing terrorism threat that people 

are able to fly safe, we don’t have another terrorist attack in America. That also people are able to move quickly to get to where they 

need to be. 

But I have seen reports that your agents are being pulled to support things like Presidential campaign events, concerts, sporting 

events, and other things. I don’t see that anywhere within your 

core mission and your core responsibilities. 

So my first question is, under what authority is TSA screening 

Americans on their way into a sporting or concert or Presidential 

campaign rally? 

Second, where does that fit into the priorities? If everything we 

have heard today about the importance of keeping our transportation safe and making sure that people can get there in a timely 

manner in this manning sort of crisis, where is the priority of supporting these events that have nothing to do with your core mission? 

Admiral NEFFENGER. Right now, we provide support to Secret 

Service when they ask under an intergovernmental service agreement. We currently have detailed—I shouldn’t say detailed. They 

are on standby. We have 75 people on standby to assist with Presidential security events over the course of the summer. We will likely be asked to do that—— 

Ms. MCSALLY. Presidential or campaign? 

Admiral NEFFENGER. This will be—we will be likely asked to do 

this at the conventions, wherever the Secret Service is providing—— 

Ms. MCSALLY. So there are reports there has been over 250 

events that TSA Agents have been supported. 

Admiral NEFFENGER. We have supported events around the 

country. I have been working with the people who are asking for 

us to let them know that we are in our own crisis right now. You 

know, we would like to have as many of those people back as possible. 

Ms. MCSALLY. Okay. So, prioritization—you don’t get to say no? 

Admiral NEFFENGER. Well, with Secret Service, we support that 

because it is—that is a pretty important mission and we are—for 

the Federal Government, we are the screening experts. 

Ms. MCSALLY. Look, I agree it is important to make sure that 

people that are attending these large-scale events are safe. But I 

don’t see that anywhere within the core competency of TSA and 

your mission. Do you agree? 

Admiral NEFFENGER. Our core mission is transportation security. 

Yes, ma’am. 

Ms. MCSALLY. Okay. So is there—possibly would you agree if we 

can work on a better way to make sure that people going to concerts are safe, while allowing you to focus on your core mission? 

32 

Admiral NEFFENGER. I would like to be fully focused on my core 

mission. 

Ms. MCSALLY. Okay. Well, thank you. 

Second, I sent you a letter on April 12 asking a number of questions related to the issues that are at our hearing today. I asked 

if you would get back to me by April 26, that is about 29 days ago. 

I haven’t heard back from you yet. I was wondering when I might 

be getting an answer to this letter? 

Admiral NEFFENGER. Let me find out. I am not sure why you 

don’t have an answer. 

Ms. MCSALLY. Okay. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to 

put my letter into the record and ask the admiral to just respond 

in writing for the record as part of this hearing. 

Chairman MCCAUL. Without objection, so ordered. 

[The information follows:] 

LETTER SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD BY HON. MARTHA MCSALLY

APRIL 12, 2016. 

Honorable PETER NEFFENGER, 

Administrator, Transportation Security Administration, 601 South 12th Street, Arlington, VA 20598. 

Dear Administrator Neffenger: As you may know, in recent months, airport security 

checkpoints nationwide have encountered exceedingly long lines and extensive wait 

times for passengers. With heavy travel season quickly approaching, I write to express my concerns about how this could affect the free flow of travel and understand 

how the Transportation Safety Administration (TSA) intends to mitigate the problem. 

In 2015, a Department of Homeland Security Office of Inspector General report 

revealed that an internal, undercover investigation conducted by Red Teams—undercover inspectors tasked with identifying weaknesses in the screening process— 

found that airport screening checkpoints across the nation failed in 67 out of 70, 

or 95%, of tests to detect threat items. These reports were extremely troubling and 

unacceptable and demonstrated that the safety of our nation’s travelers was clearly 

at risk. At a time when transportation hubs remain targets for terrorist organizations, I applaud efforts to address these shortfalls, through massive re-training efforts and security protocol revisions. However, it has now become clear that those 

efforts are also causing immense obstacles in ensuring efficient travel at a time 

when airports are experiencing record passenger volume. Additionally, it appears 

that your agency’s frontline workforce may be buckling under the pressure of operating under these circumstances while you attempt to hire more agents. I am concerned that TSA’s existing hiring practices are cumbersome and unable to meet the 

pressing mission needs of the agency. 

Part of the security line issue also pertains to the TSA PreCheck program that 

launched in 2012. Customers at our nation’s airports are spending their hard earned 

money to capitalize on a program that promised to ensure them expedited screening 

at security checkpoints only to find rampant lane closures of PreCheck lanes. 

In order to better understand how TSA plans to address the issues going forward, 

please provide answers to the following questions no later than April 26, 2016: 

1. How will TSA work to mitigate staffing shortages at Tucson International 

Airport and other airports during periods of high passenger volume? 

2. How does TSA expect passengers to enroll in the PreCheck program when 

PreCheck lanes are often closed at times when travelers need to utilize them, 

and how is TSA expanding and marketing the PreCheck program? 

3. What are TSA’s methods for responding to and adjudicating checkpoint complaints at airports? 

4. What is the current size of TSA’s National Deployment Force, and how are 

they being utilized to handle higher passenger volumes? 

5. Will TSA be employing increased use of overtime hours in order to bolster 

staffing at airport security checkpoints during periods of high passenger volume? 

6. What are TSA’s strategies for implementing efficiencies at the checkpoint 

while continuing to build a culture of security awareness and stringent adherence to protocol? 

33 

7. How is TSA streamlining and enhancing its hiring practices in order to retain 

a screening workforce of the highest caliber? 

Thank you for your attention to this matter and your timely response. 

Sincerely, 

MARTHA MCSALLY, 

Member of Congress. 

Ms. MCSALLY. Great. Thanks. 

Tomorrow, Mr. Katko’s subcommittee is going to be holding a 

hearing bringing some of the representatives of airports. My CEO 

of Tucson Airport Authority will be there, which I appreciate. She 

participated in the roundtable that we had last week where we had 

a very fruitful and vigorous discussion on some of their concerns 

and ideas. 

A couple of things that we are seeing going on in a small airport 

like Tucson—people are paying the $85 to go through PreCheck. 

They are giving their biometric information to the Government. 

But then they are showing up at the airport and the PreCheck lane 

is closed. We have two terminals. On average, the PreCheck lane 

has only been open 5 hours a day total for the 2 terminals, with 

really little to no flexibility. 

So this is a concern we are hearing really from around the country, that if people are going to spend the money and the time to 

go through it, the PreCheck lane needs to be open. Are you aware 

of this issue? Is there anything in the works to rectify this? 

Admiral NEFFENGER. Yes, I am aware of that issue. My goal is 

to get those PreCheck lanes open throughout the day so that they 

are available when passengers arrive. Some of that is a staffing 

issue and some of that is a scheduling issue. So this—the focus 

that we are putting now on daily hourly operations is showing us 

where we are having that problem. 

Some of that is just, you know, best practices across the system. 

Some of that is availability of people to go through that. In the absence of that, the other thing that we are doing is dramatically 

changing the way we move people through. So you move PreCheck 

people right to the front of the line, and you get them through in 

a PreCheck way, even if it is a standard line. So opening up the 

PreCheck lane or the line, even if you don’t have enough people to 

open that lane at that moment. 

So you have to build enough capacity—build enough volume to 

justify pulling, you know, the bodies off to open a PreCheck lane. 

But this is—my goal is to make sure that if we are going to promise a service to people, that you can deliver that service across the 

system. 

Ms. MCSALLY. Great. One of the themes of that roundtable, and 

I am sure we will hear it again tomorrow on the record, is the feeling by the airlines and the airport authorities that the lack of flexibility by the FSDs to work in partnership with the airlines and the 

airport authorities to make tactical decisions. They feel like there 

is a top-down approach coming from Washington, DC. 

In Tucson, this is even worse because we are part of this spoke 

operation where our FSD is in Phoenix. So even if you are giving 

flexibility to that person, the leader down in Tucson is still stuck 

with these top-down answers coming out of Washington, DC, and 

sometimes Phoenix. 

34 

Are you willing to initiate or will it take an act of Congress? Are 

you willing to sort of relieve some of that and allow more bottomup decision making so that the leader on the ground for TSA at 

that airport can make—— 

Admiral NEFFENGER. Absolutely. In fact, that is the message I 

have been sending out consistently to my field leads. So I think— 

I go back to my military model. You know, if I am a field commander, I want—and I have resources, I know what my mission is, 

then I want to be able to do that to the best of my ability, and 

reach out as I need for additional help. 

Ms. MCSALLY. Well, they are being told their hands are tied, and 

that they are being directed by Washington, DC, when the 

PreCheck lane can be open in Tucson. 

Admiral NEFFENGER. Well, I have new leadership now that isn’t 

following that model. 

Ms. MCSALLY. Okay. 

Admiral NEFFENGER. I have made it very clear that they do. I 

am checking on that to make sure that they are actually doing 

that. 

Ms. MCSALLY. Right. Things like that shouldn’t take an act of 

Congress, as you know. 

Admiral NEFFENGER. No, I mean, it took an act of me, and I said, 

‘‘Look, that is the way things have to happen.’’ 

Ms. MCSALLY. Great. Thanks. 

Sorry, Mr. Chairman, for going over. Appreciate it. 

Chairman MCCAUL. No problem. Thank you. 

The Chair recognizes Mr. Keating. 

Mr. KEATING. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Admiral, thank you and your staff for helping us and providing 

feedback on a bill I introduced last month that already passed the 

committee in a bipartisan fashion regarding perimeter security and 

access control points. So, appreciate that, and your actions. 

Two things on the wait times. I have spoken with airport operators regarding the need to establish really a more formal process 

in which airport operators and carriers can share predictive data. 

You know, how many seats on a flight; where the flights are; and 

try and make that as live-time, as functional as possible. 

I wanted to know where you are on that, and how easily that can 

be done, given your personnel. 

No. 2, this is actually both of them, several Federal agencies utilize private explosive detection canine programs. We use this in the 

State Department. We use it in some of the most dangerous places 

in the world to help keep our people safe. 

It is my understanding that TSA hasn’t expressed a willingness 

to turn to these type of programs, despite requests from airport operators. It is—we have had committee testimony where the airlines 

for—American Cargo Airlines Association have testified and expressed their support for that. The DHS Aviation Security Advisory 

Council voted 16 to 1 in support of these recommendations, moving 

towards a certification program. 

Can you tell us, given the minimal supply and the growing demand, what TSA can do to improve the situation, to incorporate 

more canine screening, whether or not there is an openness to 

these programs? 

35 

Admiral NEFFENGER. Well, I am open to that program. In fact, 

I have had a number of conversations with people about private 

screening. 

Mr. KEATING. Do you have the resources to move forward and expand that, then? 

Admiral NEFFENGER. Well, if by resources you mean, you know, 

kind of an oversight staff to pay attention to it, we have got—we 

have. I have the staff I have which manages the current canine 

program, and they are—they can work with private vendors who 

are interested. 

The challenge associated with that is we also have to work 

through local law enforcement. Because as you know, there has to 

be protocols established for if a dog finds something, what do I do 

now? So local law enforcement has a say in this as well. So airportby-airport in the local law enforcement—— 

Mr. KEATING. So you think the inhibiting factor isn’t money or 

the number of these resources available? It is only just coordinating with local law enforcement? 

Admiral NEFFENGER. No, No, I didn’t mean to imply that that 

was an inhibiting factor. I think part of it is the willingness of TSA 

to explore this. So I am willing to do that and I have said that 

to—— 

Mr. KEATING. We are hearing from so many groups in front of 

this committee how valuable that would be; how it—— 

Admiral NEFFENGER. I think we should explore the option. 

Mr. KEATING [continuing]. And how it would improve safety. 

Admiral NEFFENGER. Exactly. I think we should explore the options, particularly when you are thinking about cargo screening 

and other types of things that are off airport property that has to 

be done. So there is a—I think there is value there. 

Mr. KEATING. I mean, we have worked in this committee with 

Joint Terrorism Task Force, working with law enforcement. It 

would seem to me that we would be able to function with this as 

well, if we can provide any assistance or if the task force models 

are helpful. 

It is really important I think to upgrade that. I think they also 

serve as a very visible deterrent. 

Admiral NEFFENGER. There is no doubt with dogs. 

With respect to predictive data, it is relatively straightforward. 

We are doing that right now with the airlines. So the operational 

cell that I have got focused daily now, which I intend to become 

a permanent feature, includes airlines and airports to provide that 

predictive data. But in more real time, not just after the fact. I 

mean, it doesn’t help me to find out what happened last week. 

It is much more important to find out what is coming and then 

to do something about it in near real time. 

Mr. KEATING. Yes, if you could keep me informed in terms of the 

canine program, where that is, I would really appreciate that. 

Thank you for everything you are doing. Thank you for the success that you are doing under really tough situations. 

I yield back, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman MCCAUL. The Chair recognizes Mr. Donovan. 

Mr. DONOVAN. Thank you, Chairman. 

36 

Admiral, thank you for your testimony and your candidness with 

this committee. 

We saw with the shooting in LAX I guess last year, and what 

happened in Brussels, the vulnerability of the non-secure areas of 

our transportation hubs. Is that the total jurisdiction of, like, the 

State and local authorities? Or does TSA have a role in the nonsecured areas in our airports? 

Admiral NEFFENGER. Well, we have a role in assisting with setting standards and expectations. My primary role is at the checkpoint, down in the baggage area, and then out in the secure areas 

of the airport. We work very closely with local law enforcement to 

patrol and guard the public areas of the airport as well. 

Mr. DONOVAN. I know last summer—it may have happened actually before your appointment—there was the covert testing at TSA 

and the vulnerabilities of things going through, and some changes 

have been made. Have you found that those changes have improved our ability to detect things going through our checkpoints 

that shouldn’t? Is there data that supports that? 

Admiral NEFFENGER. There is. I won’t get into details in an open 

setting, but I can tell you that our own internal testing tells us 

that we have improved significantly. We have a ways to go yet, but 

we are—it is significantly improved over—I think the measures 

that we took, the retraining that we did, and the changes in focus 

have helped considerably. 

I have recently met with the inspector general. They are about 

to kick off a new round of tests—specifically testing our improvement. That will take place over the course of the next few months. 

They don’t tell you the exact schedule for obvious reasons. But I 

look forward to working with him and understanding what he is 

finding and if he is validating any of what we are finding. 

Mr. DONOVAN. Wonderful. 

My last question actually is, with your efforts to get more people 

on pre-screening and off the standard lines, does that just move the 

delay over to pre-screening? 

Admiral NEFFENGER. No, it actually dramatically improves the 

ability to move. You can move almost double the speed on a 

PreCheck line that we do. So for example, right now, even with the 

dramatically increased numbers that have enrolled in PreCheck, 92 

percent across the entire system, 92 percent of people in PreCheck 

wait less than 5 minutes for screening. So that is a significant improvement. 

Mr. DONOVAN. With the increase of people going to prescreening, 

you think that standard would uphold? 

Admiral NEFFENGER. I do. Because we can now more consistently, to Congressman McSally’s point, we can more consistently 

open the PreCheck lanes and open more of them. Because you need 

volume to justify keeping the lanes open and that volume is now 

giving me the ability to keep more lanes open. 

Mr. DONOVAN. Thank you very much, Admiral. 

Admiral NEFFENGER. Yes, sir. 

Mr. DONOVAN. I yield back the remainder of my time, Chairman. 

Chairman MCCAUL. Chair recognizes Mr. Richmond. 

Mr. RICHMOND. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, Admiral. 

I represent Baton Rouge and New Orleans and New Orleans, one 

37 

of our biggest economies is the tourism industry, which means our 

airport is vitally important. So if you are talking Mardi Gras, Jazz 

Fest or Essence Fest or any of the events, the last thing we want 

is people to come down and have a good time and then have a bad 

taste in their mouth because they waited in an airport line or they 

missed their flight. So specifically, do the FSDs have the ability to 

grant overtime if they need more employees? 

Admiral NEFFENGER. They do. I have pushed a lot of overtime 

out to the FSDs. You have got a great FSD down there, too, by the 

way. 

Mr. RICHMOND. We do. We have hardworking TSAs and unfortunately we had an incident last year. 

Admiral NEFFENGER. You did. 

Mr. RICHMOND. Where we had to use deadly force and it was 

done by the book. 

What about K–9 teams? Because that is another thing that they 

expressed. We had it for Jazz Fest. It worked tremendously well. 

So the question becomes, can we get a permanent one and as you 

expand your 10-point plan or implement it, where would we fall on 

the list? 

Admiral NEFFENGER. Well, I will get you the exact priorities on 

the list for the record. But I will tell you, I would like to expand 

our K–9—passenger screening K–9 program beyond what we currently have. So right now, I am—I pushed K–9s to the largest airports where we are experiencing some of the biggest challenges. My 

goal and my plan is to backfill those as we can bring more K–9s 

on board. I will find out where New Orleans is on that priority list. 

Mr. RICHMOND. I have read and I know about your goal to increase PreCheck passengers. One idea that I think that, you 

know—let me just say off-hand. I am opposed to the baggage fees. 

I think it is abominable. The price of gas has gone down and been 

very low for the last year, so airline ticket prices have remained 

the same. 

I think baggage fees is just another way to dig in American people’s pocket and make excessive money but at the same time I 

think that what it does is it pushes those carry-ons through our security checkpoints. Which means our margin of error, if it is 1 percent or .1 percent, now that we have millions and millions more 

bags because airlines are doing their fees, I think at some point I 

want to just prohibit them. 

But if we want to push people to PreCheck, why don’t we just 

say anyone who has PreCheck, the airlines can’t charge you baggage fees? That would drive people to go enroll in PreCheck and 

we get to not stick it to the airlines, but we get to help the American people. 

But do you think that the number of bags going through our 

checkpoints is problematic? 

Admiral NEFFENGER. There is a lot of pressure on the checkpoints. We see a lot of bags coming through the checkpoint. About 

4 times at the checkpoint of what gets checked. So this is why we 

encourage the airlines to help enforce that 1+1 rule because every 

additional bag coming through the checkpoint is a potential slowdown to the processing of people through. 

38 

Mr. RICHMOND. Because what I noticed, and probably many of 

the people on the committee since we travel so much, we will notice 

that once you get to the gate, when they make the announcements, 

most of them say that the flight is pretty full, we will complimentary check your bag. 

So you have had this backup at the checkpoint and once you get 

through the checkpoint and you get to the gate, they say, hey, how 

about we check your bags for you now for free. Well, if they are 

going to do that they might as well do it on the front end, alleviate 

some of your pressure and also help us protect the American people. So I really would hope that you look at that. 

Let me switch topics a little bit. I know that you are going out 

for bid on—you have a RFI out for your IT on your secure flight 

program. I would just ask that you look at using shared services 

with the National Finance Center, which already, I think, does 

your payroll and other things for you. They have great software development team, it is already a branch of Government. I think they 

can help you get your needs to market or they can service you a 

little bit faster than the process you are going to go in. I think they 

will save you a tremendous amount of money. 

So I would just ask that you all really entertain using a shared 

service with National Finance Center to develop the software for 

the Secure Flight program that you are looking for. 

Admiral NEFFENGER. We will take a look at that. 

Mr. RICHMOND. With that, Mr. Chairman, I will yield back. 

Chairman MCCAUL. Thank the gentleman. The Chair recognizes 

Mr. Carter. 

Mr. CARTER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Neffenger, thank 

you for being here. Mr. Neffenger, as you know, I represent Georgia. Of course, Hartsfield-Jackson Airport, one of the busiest airport in the world, this is a major problem the backlog that we have 

there. 

In fact I just went out, stepped outside a few minutes ago to 

have a picture taken with some visitors from Georgia. They were 

telling me this morning, this morning, you know, one of them commented, I only had to wait 30 minutes in line. 

Well, you know, it is unacceptable what is happening here. I just 

want to make sure that we are on the same page here. At 

Hartsfield recently, they just opened up the south checkpoint and 

started using a new system, the radio frequency identification on 

the bins so that they can put their stuff in there and they don’t 

have to load the bins. Hopefully that is going to help some. 

You and I have spoken before about privatization, and as you 

know, and full disclosure, I am really big on privatization. Atlanta 

and the bigger airports are indicating to us, at least to me, that 

it is beyond the scope of a bureaucracy to be able to do this. I just 

don’t get a warm and fuzzy feeling that you are embracing privatization here. 

Congress passed the Screening Partnership Program. Tell me 

what you are doing to implement that. We need to get to a point 

where you are on the other side of the table. You are asking the 

questions and overseeing this as opposed to being here answering 

the question from us. 

39 

Admiral NEFFENGER. We have made a lot of changes to streamline that process. I was concerned that it takes a long time because 

it has to go out on bid, it has to go out on contract and the like. 

I am—I have said repeatedly that the law allows for this, I will 

work with any airport that is interested. 

In fact, I have directed airports like Atlanta to go out and talk 

to San Francisco because that is the only large Category X airport 

that has a contracted screening force and we will continue to work 

with them. I think there are things that we can do to—we are 

somewhat hampered by the way the Federal acquisition rules 

work. Remember, that is a workforce that is contracted to the Federal Government, not—— 

Mr. CARTER. Hold on—I don’t mean to interrupt you. But I want 

to know, you say you are hampered. I want to know how I can help 

you to become uninhampered, if that is a word. 

Admiral NEFFENGER. Well as I said, it is—we follow the contracting rules for—under the Federal Government contracting requirements. It is a contract to the Federal Government. So I want 

to make sure that it is fair and it is open competition and you have 

to give people the opportunity to participate in that. We will work 

with anybody who wants to do that. 

Mr. CARTER. Well understand that I want to work with you so 

that we can streamline that process. I still don’t get the feeling 

that you are embracing it. I want to know what you are doing to 

encourage it—to the privatization of it. 

Admiral NEFFENGER. Well, again, it is up to the airport to determine whether they want to do it. We advertise its availability. We 

make available information about it. There is a Screening Private 

Partnership office that manages that. 

What I can offer you is to bring the person who is running that 

office up to outline what has changed over the past year and what 

we do to make that information available to airports, if they are 

interested and inclined—— 

Mr. CARTER. Okay. A couple other things real quick. First of all, 

as you know, FLETC is in my district. That is where you do your 

training. I think it is a great facility, does a wonderful job of training. We still incorporate that, even in the private sector. I mean, 

they can still be trained down there. We—— 

Admiral NEFFENGER. I train—I have trained the private screeners as well. 

Mr. CARTER. Absolutely. Absolutely. So, you know, it is not as if 

they are not going to get the same kind of training that we currently get for the employees. It is just going to be management. It 

appears to me by the conversations that I have had with some of 

the smaller airports that that is where the problem is. That there 

is a void, a gap, if you will, between the local senior TSA reps in 

between the management up here in the District of Columbia, that 

they are not communicating. 

Can you speak to that? 

Admiral NEFFENGER. You mean the FSDs in the field and 

the—— 

Mr. CARTER. Yes. 

Admiral NEFFENGER. Well, I felt that the same thing. That is 

why I have made some leadership changes and some structural 

40 

changes to the way we do it and I have pushed a lot of authority 

out to the FSDs. They already had that authority, in my opinion. 

They just needed to know that they could use that authority. I 

have been trying to drive less operations from headquarters, because you can’t drive from headquarters. You got to provide guidance and resources. 

Mr. CARTER. Absolutely. I am glad to hear you say that. 

Admiral NEFFENGER. Yes. 

Mr. CARTER. But you know, and I—again, I feel like what is happening here is we are creating this giant bureaucracy that at some 

point we are not going to be able ever to break it down. Now is the 

time for us to start going more toward privatization, so that we 

don’t get this giant bureaucracy that obviously is not performing to 

the level that we want it to perform to. 

You know, one of the first things they taught us when we got 

into the Georgia legislature was, when you are in a hole, stop 

digging. We need to stop digging, because it ain’t working the way 

it is working now. So, I encourage you to look at this privatization 

and to push the privatization. That is the route that I would see 

us needing to go. 

Admiral NEFFENGER. Yes, sir. 

Mr. CARTER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, I yield back. 

Chairman MCCAUL. The Chair recognizes Mr. Hurd. 

Mr. HURD. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Admiral, appreciate you 

being here. I know it has been a long morning. 

I have some, couple of basic questions, and I love your comments 

on the philosophy of getting passengers through checkpoints quickly, versus security effectiveness and how you balance that. 

Admiral NEFFENGER. Oh, well, first and foremost, you have to be 

effective at what we do. We learned that lesson the hard way when 

the Inspector General report came out last year. 

So it was imperative that we refocused. This was not—I will say, 

not the fault of the front-line workforce. They were doing exactly 

what they were told to do, get people through the line fast. If you 

do that, you will get people through the line fast, but you might 

not do your job very well. 

So that was the first thing. But you still have to ensure that you 

do it as efficiently as possible. Those 2 things are not mutually exclusive in my mind. There are efficiencies that we can gain in the 

way we deploy our people, in the way we employ them and in the 

way they are managed. 

I think an awful lot of the work that I am doing is in really reforming and transforming the management piece of the organization, because that is where the greatest opportunity for fixing that 

is. 

So, I think we can do a lot to improve through-put. Then there 

is a technological piece to it as well. I—you know, TSA is still operating equipment that was operated for the past 30 years in terms 

of—with the exception of some of the upgrades to the software and 

the X-ray machines, the basic system still is a manual system. 

So, there are things we can do that will dramatically improve our 

ability to process people more efficiently, while still doing our job 

really well. 

41 

Mr. HURD. Do copy. The next question, and I know this is about 

how TSA works with local—with individual airports. I know the 

answer is going to be ‘‘it depends.’’ All right. But are you getting 

the kind of support from airports when they build a new terminal? 

Are you getting the opportunity to provide input and guidance on 

how to design it in such a way that it would improve efficiencies 

of security? 

Are you also—do you get the kind of support—you know, you 

don’t run the airports, right? I think folks forget that. Are you getting the kind of support from the airport personnel on non-security 

tasks that could be going on? 

I would just welcome your, kind-of, general thoughts on that? 

Admiral NEFFENGER. Well, thank you. With respect to the last 

point, we have gotten some great support from airlines and airports over the past few months to provide assistance for non-security-related duties. Everything from monitoring exit lanes to binrunning, to helping guide people into the appropriate checkpoints. 

So, I have been pleased with that. What I believe is that TSA 

needed to do a better job of engaging at the local level, airport-byairport, as well as at the Federal. I think we have always had pretty good relations with the big associations, but it is on the ground 

at the individual airport where the difference is made. 

So, we have been working very hard at pushing our feet. We are 

going back to that comment about the FSDs and authorities, is to 

get them engaged with their local people, share with them their 

staffing models, share with them their current challenges, learn 

from each other. More importantly, find out when they have got 

plans to modernize or improve their infrastructure, because that is 

an opportunity for us to build in some new capability and some 

new space that would allow us to operate better. 

Mr. HURD. Great. My last is a comment, not a question. I just 

want to say thank you for working with us on getting some TSA 

agents back into small airports in some of these small towns. 

Admiral NEFFENGER. Yes, sir. 

Mr. HURD. I know we have been talking a lot about wait lines 

at big airports, but I am looking forward to flying back to Washington, DC, from Del Rio, Texas, in the next couple of weeks once 

that gets set up. 

So, I appreciate your willingness to work with us and making 

sure that the small-town airports and these small towns benefit 

from the economic advantages of having a functioning airport. 

So, thank you. Mr. Chairman, I yield back. 

Chairman MCCAUL. The Chair recognizes Mr. Walker. 

Mr. WALKER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Admiral Neffenger, 

thank you for being here today. 

Earlier this week, Kelly Hoggan was removed from his post as 

head of the security operations. In another committee, a recent 

hearing—in fact, we talked that, you and I, and some of the questions there. We talked about the $90,000 bonuses as well. 

It is not where I want to stay or camp too much this morning, 

but I do want to ask a couple questions in regards. What is Mr. 

Hoggan’s annual salary? 

Admiral NEFFENGER. He is an SES level, so his annual salary is, 

I believe, right around $180,000. 

42 

Mr. WALKER. Yes. I have got $181,000, so I think we are pretty 

close on that. 

Can you confirm if Mr. Hoggan is on paid administrative leave? 

Admiral NEFFENGER. He is currently on paid administrative 

leave, yes, sir. 

Mr. WALKER. Okay. So, if my math in my head—that is about 

$500 a day. According to the DHS’s administration lead policy of 

2015—I am sure you are pretty familiar with that? 

Admiral NEFFENGER. Yes, sir. 

Mr. WALKER. I would like to read it for the record, if that is okay, 

Mr. Chairman? 

Chairman MCCAUL. Without objection, so ordered. 

Mr. WALKER. The policy states managers must decide whether 

the continued presence of the employee in the work place may pose 

a threat to the employee or others, result in loss or damage to Government property or otherwise jeopardize legitimate Government 

interests. Where such a risk does not exist, the employee should remain in the workplace. 

So Neffenger, in the case of Mr. Hoggan, which of these instances 

applies? 

Admiral NEFFENGER. Mr. Hoggan is currently—we are resolving 

this, as you know. I needed—I wanted to make a leadership 

change. I made that leadership change. It was my considered opinion that I needed a new direction going forward. 

We are working to process with respect to Mr. Hoggan, and I will 

work that process very rapidly. 

Mr. WALKER. So, I am not sure that—let me rephrase the question, here. Why is it that you have made the choice to put him on 

paid administrative leave when there doesn’t seem to be any threat 

to the organization? 

Admiral NEFFENGER. It is a very short-term decision, so while 

the process—it allows us to make the process for what the next 

steps are with that, so I can move forward with the new direction 

that I need to ensure we meet the challenges coming forward. 

Mr. WALKER. Sure. I want to respect that. So, when you say 

short-term, can you give us a ballpark, an idea? What does that 

mean? 

Admiral NEFFENGER. I intend to determine that this week. 

Mr. WALKER. Okay. All right. I want to go back also, where there 

are tough places to dig out, that is—there are places, but also 

where I want to commend you. 

In the past, the TSA has had involuntary or voluntary moving 

expenses in the neighborhood of $200,000. I believe the one gentleman testified, from Maine, that he had $100,000 relocation expense. 

Is it my recollection that, if my memory serves me correct, that 

you are no longer operating under that particular mind set or those 

procedures, is that correct? 

Admiral NEFFENGER. Oh, I discontinued that practice. 

Mr. WALKER. Okay. 

Admiral NEFFENGER. I have capped relocation expenses. 

Mr. WALKER. All right, and I appreciate you doing that. Let me 

follow up with one more question here on Mr. Hoggan. 

43 

In the same memo which announced Mr. Hoggan was no longer 

assistant administrator, you announced a new chief of operations 

who will direct Nation-wide screening operations and oversee daily 

allocation of forces and capabilities. 

According to your website, TSA’s assistant administrator for security operations is responsible for, ‘‘Airport checkpoint and baggage screening operations.’’ Is that true? Is that a fair statement? 

Admiral NEFFENGER. Yes, sir. 

Mr. WALKER. Okay. All right. So, in concluding with Mr. Hoggan 

before I move on to something else here, are you at a place where 

that you can reveal any long-term plans with Mr. Hoggan at this 

point? 

Admiral NEFFENGER. I cannot at this point, no sir. 

Mr. WALKER. Okay. All right. Well, we will certainly respect 

that. 

I am going to—a very general question. I have got a minute-anda-half left, and I want to give you an opportunity. The overall culture of the TSA has not been where the American people expect it, 

where Congress should expect it, where the taxpayers should expect it. 

Briefly, can you tell me, philosophically perspective, why do you 

feel like that you are being able to turn this tide? We have heard 

several Members talk about it today, that you are undergoing an 

impossible—or trying to take on an impossible task. 

That doesn’t encourage you much today. Obviously, with your 

background, you would have not taken on this position unless you 

felt like there were improvements that could be made and things 

that could be done. You can share a couple specifics if you would 

like, but I would like to hear an overall general purview of why you 

think that you are able to turn this ship in the right direction? 

Admiral NEFFENGER. Well, let me start just by talking about our 

workforce. 

We have a really tremendous workforce. I don’t just say that 

lightly. I have been out meeting with them in the now 10 monthsplus that I have been in the job. I go out to the front lines. 

We have people who are—they come from all walks of life. There 

are people with graduate degrees, with undergraduate, some high 

school graduates. There are people who are former military, people 

in their second careers. 

So, what gives me—what gave me immediate hope was seeing 

not only the passion and the dedication of that workforce, but their 

resilience. 

You know, I think—I really believe they have one of the toughest 

jobs in Government. I mean, they—the average screener at a large 

airport sees more than 13,000 individuals every day. They have to 

remain professional, and they have to remain committed. These are 

true public servants. 

That said, I think they needed a clear sense of mission, a clear 

focus from leadership on mission. They needed that focus to stay 

constant and straightforward. I think about my time in the military. What is it that makes the military able to take people from 

all walks of life and focus them on their duties and have the kind 

of response that we have that has created the best military in the 

44 

world? It is a clear sense of purpose and mission, a reminder of 

that, an engagement in that across the workforce. 

So I was surprised to discover when I came to TSA that there 

was no—there was no true formal training program across the entire organization at any level of the organization. To me, that is 

foundational to creating culture and to creating engagement. So it 

was very important. I was really pleased that Congress agreed that 

founding a TSA Academy for the first time ever was a very important first step. 

It is a first step. I wanted to get that front-line workforce back 

engaged and connected in a way that they hadn’t been before. I 

mean, we were just training people all over the country, individuals 

inconsistently. So now, we have a consistent training program. You 

need to do that across the entire workforce. 

So I started for the first time ever this year a rising leader development program which looks at all of our mid-grade employees and 

begins to teach them about what it means to be in charge and leading. 

So we need to do leadership training, we need to do skills training, and we need to do it consistently. The reason I believe the ship 

can turn is I look to where the United States military was postVietnam, and everybody said it was a broken organization. It 

turned itself around. How? By doing exactly those things: Focusing 

on the mission, reengaging with the workforce, going back to fundamentals, and training across the board. 

I believe that is the answer. It doesn’t happen overnight, but we 

are already seeing some good signs with some of the new people 

that have been coming out of the academy. There is already this 

sense of passion. I get—I should share with you some of the e-mails 

I am getting from—— 

Mr. WALKER. I will just say my time is expired. So it will be up 

to the Chairman to extend that. But I do appreciate your answers. 

Mr. Chairman, I yield back. 

Chairman MCCAUL. The Chair recognizes Mr. Ratcliffe. 

Mr. RATCLIFFE. I thank the Chair. 

Administrator Neffenger, thank you for being here today. Over 

the course of the last years, you know, we have had hearings on 

this committee on security breaches caused by improper screening 

of employees of airports and airlines and vendors, we have had 

hearings about the agency’s trouble with excessive waste and cost 

and some security failures, specifically a hearing on the DHS IG’s 

investigation that showed that we had as many as 95 percent of 

some banned security items being able to get through and with 

aviation workers with links to terrorism not being disclosed. 

I say all that not to lay blame with you, but to highlight that you 

were brought in at a very challenging time at the TSA. Clearly, 

there is a lot of work to be done here and I do want to say that 

I have noticed that you have taken proactive steps to try and rectify some of these problems. But now today, we have got another 

problem to talk about. 

These long lines are not just an inconvenience to travelers, they 

do pose a security risk, having hundreds of passengers standing 

close together in an unsecure area. We saw what happened in 

Brussels with respect to that and I know that the TSA is working 

45 

every day to try and prevent those types of things that happened 

in Brussels from happening here. 

But I do want to follow up in this particular area because I know 

you have attributed some of the long lines to personnel departure 

at TSA in previous years and that the agency has not yet replaced 

some of those folks. I know that through the Appropriations Committee, we repurposed—Congress has repurposed some $30 million, 

$34 million to allow for the hiring of additional TSA agents. 

But I have some concerns about the allocation of additional TSA 

agents. It is not just about getting screeners to the airports, but 

about allocating those resources strategically to alleviate some of 

the long lines that we are seeing right now. To that point, I know 

there was a transportation security roundtable last week where 

stakeholders repeatedly said that they thought that the staffing 

model at the TSA was fundamentally flawed. 

Now, no one wants to sacrifice security simply to lower wait 

times at the airport, but if you or if we can improve efficiency of 

security processes without sacrificing safety, I know that is something that we all want to get to. 

So I have heard in the past that TSA had the capability to schedule its workforce to match up with the airline flight schedules and 

passenger load, but that it dropped that and instead, now uses an 

electronic time and attendance system that has a lot of—requires 

a lot of manual changes to deal with employees on leave and irregular operations and weather-related delays. First of all, is that correct? 

Admiral NEFFENGER. Well, we do use an electric time and attendance system, but we still have the flexibility to meet demand. 

We just—I don’t think we did it very well. 

Mr. RATCLIFFE. Okay. Well, are you—can you tell me are you 

looking at any commercial technology solutions that would align 

workforce needs with airline and airport passenger flow? If so, 

when would that be deployed? 

Admiral NEFFENGER. Well, what we have done immediately is we 

are working with the airlines directly and the airports. We have 

opened up the full staffing model to the airports—at the airlines 

in particular. About 2 months ago we had all of the major airlines 

in at a very senior level to say here it is. We are airport by airport, 

where everybody—anybody wants to look it, looking at that staffing 

model as well. 

I think that there is work to be done on the staffing model. It 

needs to be flexible and agile enough to meet the demand as it arrives. What I am learning is that the airlines are exceptionally 

good at predicting and responding to their peak periods. We can 

learn a lot from them and they are helping us adjust our staffing 

model. We even saw in Chicago a couple of the key adjustments 

that we made right after that, you know, day that we had all the 

challenges, it dramatically decreased the line waits. 

Mr. RATCLIFFE. Well, I am glad to hear that you are engaging 

the airports and the airlines in that regard. To that point about the 

staffing model, are you taking into account the different layout 

structures of different airports? So for example, the DFW airport 

in my home State of Texas has 15 screening check points, where 

I know the Denver Airport only has 3. Obviously, that makes a big 

46 

difference in terms of staffing requirements. Is that something that 

is being taken into account? 

Admiral NEFFENGER. It is, and you have to do that because what 

you say applies the real challenges. Some airports are big and open 

and have lots of opportunity to run efficiently, other airports are 

very constrained by space and you have multiple small checkpoints 

distributed across the airport. So you have to think very differently 

about managing those more constrained airports than you do a 

large open airport. 

Mr. RATCLIFFE. Well, on that same vein, and my time is expired, 

but I do want to ask you this question as well: Do you think that 

Federal security directors located at the airports should have more 

flexibility in determining the local needs of the airports where they 

are stationed? 

Admiral NEFFENGER. Well, I have given them complete flexibility. That said, it is important to note that I only have so much 

staff to go around, so if they come to me and say, ‘‘I want 500 more 

people,’’ I mean, they—I have got to work with them to get there. 

But within the resources that they currently have allocated to 

them, they have the ability to flex those resources however they 

need to, working with the local airports and airlines. Then if they 

need more, then they need to—they have the ability to come to me 

and say, ‘‘Look, I think I need more and here is what I need.’’ 

Mr. RATCLIFFE. Thanks very much for being here today, and 

thank you for your candor in your testimony and answering questions today. 

With that, I yield back. 

Chairman MCCAUL. I think the gentleman. 

Just want to remind Members that tomorrow morning at 9 a.m., 

the Subcommittee on Transportation will be holding a hearing with 

local—with airline authorities, airport authorities, and airlines and 

look forward to that perspective tomorrow. 

Members of the committee may have additional questions. We 

would ask that you respond in writing. The Ranking Member is 

recognized. 

Mr. THOMPSON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would just like 

unanimous consent to enter into the record a letter to Administrator Neffenger dated April 19, 2016. 

Chairman MCCAUL. Without objection, so ordered. 

[The information follows:] 

LETTER SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD BY RANKING MEMBER BENNIE G. THOMPSON

APRIL 19, 2016. 

The Honorable PETER NEFFENGER, 

Administrator, Transportation Security Administration, U.S. Department of Homeland Security, 601 12th Street South, Arlington, VA 22202. 

DEAR ADMINISTRATOR NEFFENGER: I am writing to express the serious concerns I 

have regarding staffing issues at airports throughout our nation. One recurring complaint I hear from airport officials is current staffing allocation models do not adequately correspond with the airport’s needs. 

According to a recent press release from the Transportation Security Administration, many airports around the nation are experiencing substantial growth in checkpoint volume. During peak times passengers are experiencing significant delays. 

Certain airports have the capacity to operate multiple lanes within security checkpoint areas; however, starting shortages often leave the lanes unused, and as a result, the queue grows and wait times increase. I am concerned the inability to take 

47 

1GAO–10–763: Aviation Security—Efforts to Validate TSA’s Passenger Screening Behavior 

Detection Program Underway, but Opportunities Exist to Strengthen Validation and Address 

Operational Challenges. 2GAO–14–159: Aviation Security: TSA Should Limit future Funding for Behavior Detection 

Activities. 

advantage of airports’ infrastructure may create an additional vulnerability by not 

having individuals screened in unused lanes due to staffing shortages. 

Understanding we are working in a time where budgets are constrained, I realize 

additional funds will be needed to provide more staffing at airports. However, I believe a thorough look must be taken at the current staffing allocation model and 

standard operating procedures to ascertain if any room exists where efficiencies can 

be achieved. 

One possibility for flexibility and efficiencies could be achieved through the 

Screening of Passengers by Observation Techniques (SPOT) program. In May 2010, 

the Government Accountability Office (GAO) issued a report on TSA’s efforts to validate this program.1 GAO analyzed (1) the extent to which TSA validated the SPOT 

program before wide-scale deployment, (2) implementation challenges, and (3) the 

extent to which TSA measures SPOT’s effect on aviation security. GAO found TSA 

deployed SPOT nation-wide without first validating the scientific basis for identifying suspicious passengers in an airport environment; TSA was experiencing implementation challenges, including not fully utilizing the resources it has available to 

systematically collect and analyze information obtained by Behavior Detection Officers (BDO) on passengers who may pose a threat to the aviation system; and the 

agency lacked outcome-oriented measures to evaluate the program’s progress toward 

reaching its goals. 

In November 2013, the Government Accountability Office made public a report 

recommending TSA limit future funding for TSA’s SPOT program and suggested 

Congress consider the lack of scientific validation for the program when providing 

funding for the agency.2 To my knowledge, TSA has not scientifically validated the 

usage of BDOs. Given these facts, I believe you should strongly consider the possibility of reallocating these individuals to perform other screening functions within 

the staffing allocation model. 

I look forward to working with you to identify and address this important issue. 

If you have any questions or concerns, please contact Hope Goins, Chief Counsel for 

Oversight. 

Thank you, 

BENNIE G. THOMPSON, 

Ranking Member. 

Chairman MCCAUL. Pursuant to committee rule 7(c), the hearing 

record will be open for 10 days for statements and questions from 

Members. 

Admiral, thank you for being here today. I know you are a newcomer to this job and certainly, the challenges are great. But I 

think you are well-equipped to solve those and we look forward to 

working with you to solve these problems for the Nation, and we 

thank you for your service. 

Without objection, the committee stands adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 12:09 p.m., the committee was adjourned.] 

(49) 

A P P E N D I X 

QUESTIONS FROM HON. MARTHA MCSALLY FOR PETER V. NEFFENGER

Question 1. What law gives the Secret Service the ability to call in TSA’s Visible 

Intermodal Prevention and Response, or VIPR, teams for additional security presence at events such as campaign rallies, political party conventions, NFL games, 

NASCAR races, and concerts? 

Answer. TSA’s Visible Intermodal Prevention and Response (VIPR) teams often 

provide support to the United States Secret Service for events designated as National Special Security Events (NSSEs), such as Presidential Inaugurations, and the 

Republican and Democratic National Conventions. This assistance is rendered pursuant to the Secret Service’s authority to plan, coordinate, and implement security 

operations at special events of National significance, 18 U.S.C. § 3056(e), TSA’s authority to provide personnel and services to other Federal agencies, 49 U.S.C. 

§ 114(m), and TSA’s authority to conduct VIPR missions to augment the security of 

any mode of transportation, 6 U.S.C. § 1112. 

VIPR operations at transportation venues may coincide with events given a Special Event Assessment Rating (SEAR) by the Department of Homeland Security, 

with a designated Federal Coordinator to lead the Federal Government’s operational 

plans to provide security for the event. These VIPR deployments are made under 

the program’s own authority, 6 U.S.C. § 1112, which specifically authorizes the development of VIPR teams to augment security in any mode of transportation at any 

location in the United States. This authority adds greater specificity to the authority 

granted to TSA by U.S.C. § 114(d), which establishes TSA’s general authority and 

responsibility for security in all modes of transportation. 

Whether an NSSE or SEAR event, the Secret Service or other designated Federal 

Coordinators are aware of TSA’s VIPR capability and may request that VIPR operations be part of the overall security plans for the areas associated with those 

events. 

Question 2a. How many times have the VIPR teams been deployed to events described in question No. 1? Please break down the number of each of the previouslymentioned events VIPR teams have been deployed to. 

Answer. During fiscal year 2016, VIPR teams have or will be deployed to transportation locations in support of 5 NSSE and to augment security at transportation 

venues associated with 15 highly-rated SEAR events. The NSSEs include the State 

of the Union Address, Nuclear Security Summit, the Republican National Convention, the Democratic National Convention, and a portion of United Nations General 

Assembly (UNGA). The highly-rated SEAR events include the remainder of the 

UNGA, the Rose Bowl Parade and Game, Super Bowl 50 (San Francisco Bay Area), 

the New York City, Chicago and Boston Marathons, Fourth of July celebrations in 

Washington, DC, Boston, and Chicago, the Indianapolis 500, the Papal Southern 

Border visit (El Paso, TX), the Thanksgiving Day Parade (New York City), the 

Times Square New Year’s Eve celebration, and the National Museum of African 

American History and Culture Dedication (Washington, DC). 

Question 2b. Has there been security operations conducted by VIPR teams at any 

private events? 

Answer. TSA has not deployed VIPR teams to private events. 

Question 2c. Does TSA have the legal authority to deny this request? 

Question 2d. If not, do you want the authority to be able to do so? 

Answer. TSA is not required by law to deploy VIPR teams in support of NSSE 

or SEAR events. However, every attempt is typically made to utilize the VIPR 

teams to mitigate terrorist risk at transportation locations associated with the 

events. 

Question 3a. How many VIPR teams does the TSA currently have? 

Answer. The Transportation Security Administration (TSA) has 31 Visible Intermodal Prevention and Response (VIPR) teams based in 20 locations Nation-wide. 

50 

Question 3b. How many TSA agents make up a VIPR team? 

Answer. Basic VIPR teams are composed of 1 Supervisory Federal Air Marshal 

(SFAM), 6 Federal Air Marshals (FAM), 2–4 Behavior Detection Officers, 1 Transportation Security Inspector—Aviation, 1 Transportation Security Inspector—Surface, and 1 Transportation Security Specialist—Explosives. Some locations include 

additional teams of 1 SFAM and 6 FAMs. 

Question 3c. Are there Federal Air Marshals who serve on the VIPR teams? 

Answer. The appropriation for the VIPR Program, which is separate from the appropriation for the Federal Air Marshal Service, supports 227 positions for SFAMs 

and FAMs who serve on the VIPR teams or with the VIPR Program office. 

Question 4a. Much of TSA’s security expenses are paid for through the Passenger 

Fee, also known as the September 11 Security Fee. 

How are the services provided by VIPR team paid for? 

Answer. TSA’s VIPR team services are funded in the current fiscal year in the 

Surface Appropriation. 

Question 4b. Does the Passenger fee fund VIPR teams in any way? 

Answer. Passenger fees do not fund VIPR teams as the Passenger Fee offsets appropriated resources in the Aviation Appropriation. 

Question 4c. Have funds collected through TSA PreCheck fees ever funded any of 

these operations? 

Answer. TSA PreCheck fees to do not fund VIPR services, as this would be an 

unauthorized use of those credentialing fee collections. 

Æ