REVIEW OF THE TRANSPORTATION SECURITY 

ADMINISTRATION’S USE OF PAT-DOWNS IN 

SCREENING PROCEDURES 

(REDACTED) 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY 

Office of Inspector General 

Office of Audits 

OIG-06-10 November 2005 
Office of Inspector General 

U.S. Department of Homeland Security 

Washington, DC 20528

Preface 

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Office of Inspector General (OIG) was established by 

the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (Public Law 107-296) by amendment to the Inspector General 

Act of 1978. This is one of a series of audit, inspection, and special reports prepared as part of our 

DHS oversight responsibility to promote economy, effectiveness, and efficiency within the 

Department. 

This report represents an abbreviated version of our sensitive security information report addressing 

the strengths and weaknesses of the Transportation Security Administration’s use of pat-downs as 

part of its screening procedures. It is based on interviews with employees and officials of relevant 

agencies and institutions, direct observations, and a review of applicable documents. 

The information contained in this report has been developed to the best knowledge available to us, 

and has been discussed in draft with appropriate management officials. It is our hope that this report 

will result in more effective, efficient, and economical operations. We express our appreciation to all 

of those who contributed to the preparation of this report. 

 

Richard L. Skinner 

Inspector General 
Contents 

Review of TSA’s Use of Pat-downs in Screening Procedures 

Executive Summary....................................................................................................................... 1 

Background......................................................................................................................................2 

Results of Audit ................................................................................................3 

 Screeners Followed SOP When Conducting Pat-Downs............................................................3 

 Pat-Down Screening Training ....................................................................................................4 

 Investigation and Resolution of Pat-Down Complaints..............................................................5 

Appendices 

Appendix A: Purpose, Scope, and Methodology.....................................................................7 

Appendix B: Major Contributors to This Report ....................................................................9 

Appendix C: Report Distribution ..........................................................................................10 

Abbreviations 

 DHS Department of Homeland Security 

 FSD Federal Security Director 

 IMS Inquiry Management System 

 LAX Los Angeles International Airport 

 OIG Office of Inspector General 

 PMIS Performance Management Information System 

 SOP Standard Operating Procedures 

 TSA Transportation Security Administration 
Review of TSA’s Use of Pat-downs in Screening Procedures 

Page 1

OIG Audit 

Report

Department of Homeland Security 

Office of Inspector General 

Executive Summary 

This report presents an abbreviated version of our review of the 

Transportation Security Administration’s (TSA) use of pat-downs in screening 

procedures. 

In September 2004, the TSA made changes to strengthen its screening 

procedures in response to the August 2004 midair explosions of two Russian 

airliners, believed to have been caused by Chechen women transporting 

explosive devices concealed under their clothing. New passenger screening 

procedures included more frequent use of pat-down inspections, more latitude 

for screeners to refer individuals for additional screening, and increased use of 

explosives trace detection machines for passenger carry-on bag inspections. 

We conducted a review of the additional procedures at the request of 

Congressman Edward J. Markey because of his concern that TSA screeners 

subjected some female air travelers to overly intrusive pat-down inspections 

as part of the additional screening process. Our objectives were to determine 

whether: TSA screeners adequately advised passengers of their rights under 

the screening process; TSA appropriately accommodated requests related to 

those rights; additional screening practices were applied proportionately to 

males and females; screeners were adequately trained to perform pat-down 

inspections; and TSA had procedures in place to investigate and resolve 

complaints about the process. 

Overall, TSA screeners are applying pat-down procedures properly. Screeners 

advised passengers of their rights prior to conducting pat-down inspections, 

explained why the additional screening was necessary, and conducted patdown inspections according to the training received on the revised additional 

screening procedures. Specifically, screeners used the back of their hand 

when patting down sensitive areas; screeners conducting pat-down inspections 

were of the same gender as passengers; screeners offered private screening 

locations to passengers subject to pat-down inspections; and female 

passengers undergoing pat-down inspections were not unnecessarily delayed. 

In February 2005, TSA developed its “Pledge To Travelers” to better inform 

passengers of their rights and to emphasize its commitment to customer 

service. 
Review of TSA’s Use of Pat-downs in Screening Procedures 

Page 2 

In December 2004, TSA modified the September 2004 additional screening 

procedures to reflect a more targeted, less intrusive pat-down inspection. 

Following implementation of the modified procedures, pat-down complaints 

received by TSA declined significantly. During the period November 22, 

2004, through January 2, 2005, TSA received 79 pat-down complaints per 

million passengers selected for pat-downs. From January 3, 2005, through 

February 28, 2005, TSA received 13 pat-down complaints per million 

passengers selected for pat-downs. To further address screener pat-down 

performance TSA provided additional training to screeners including 

briefings, training aids, and through its On-line Learning Center. 

TSA follows procedures for investigating and resolving pat-down complaints. 

Federal Security Directors (FSDs) were investigating and resolving pat-down 

complaints according to SOP. TSA monitors the number and nature of the 

complaints to track trends and identify areas of concern that may require 

special attention or corrective action. 

We are not making any recommendations in this report because screeners are 

complying with TSA’s additional screening SOP, and TSA has taken action to 

make additional screening less intrusive and to resolve pat-down complaints. 

TSA management concurred with our findings and did not provide written 

comments. 

Background 

Passenger screening is critical to the security of the nation’s aviation system, 

particularly after the events of September 11, 2001. TSA is responsible for all 

passenger and baggage screening to ensure that weapons and other prohibited 

items are not brought on board aircraft. Passengers refusing to be screened 

are not permitted to board an aircraft. 

From October 1, 2004, through February 28, 2005, TSA processed 289 

million passengers, of which 46 million, or 16%, were selected for additional 

screening. Of these, only 1,471 or .003%, complaints were filed. 

We conducted our fieldwork from December 2004 through March 2005 at 10 

airports to determine screeners’ compliance with additional screening 

procedures. A more detailed description of our purpose, scope, and 

methodology is provided as Appendix A. 
Review of TSA’s Use of Pat-downs in Screening Procedures 

Page 3 

Results of Audit 

 Screeners Followed SOP When Conducting Pat-Downs 

Generally, screeners followed TSA’s prescribed procedures for conducting patdowns. From December 2004 through February 2005, we conducted tests of 

TSA’s passenger pat-down screening procedures at 10 airports throughout the 

country to determine whether TSA screeners adequately advised passengers of 

their rights, and conducted pat-down inspections appropriately and according to 

revised pat-down procedures. Specifically, screeners advised passengers of 

their rights prior to conducting pat-down inspections, and explained why the 

additional screening was necessary. Accordingly, female passengers 

undergoing pat-down inspections were not subjected unnecessarily to overly 

intrusive search procedures; were not targeted by screeners for search; and were 

not unnecessarily delayed. Approximately 64% of the testing was performed 

by female auditors. 

 

Also, a TSA contractor conducted a customer satisfaction survey to measure 

screener performance and to gather data that could be used to improve 

performance. Results of the survey showed that air travelers gave consistently 

high marks to TSA security screeners. Between 80% and 95% of passengers 

gave positive responses when asked about seven aspects of the federal security 

screening process, which included thoroughness and courtesy of screeners. 

TSA evaluated the effectiveness of its September 2004 pat-down procedures, 

including customer feedback, and as a result, revised pat-down procedures. 

The number of pat-down complaints received by TSA declined significantly 

after the December 2004 procedures were put in place. TSA reported 1,471 

pat-down complaints from October 1, 2004, through February 28, 2005. 

During the period of November 22, 2004, through January 2, 2005, TSA 

received 79 pat-down complaints per million passengers selected for patdowns. From January 3, 2005, through February 28, 2005, TSA only received 

13 complaints per million passengers selected for pat-downs. 

In February 2005, TSA unveiled its “Pledge To Travelers.” TSA developed 

the Pledge so travelers would know what to expect and to dispel concerns they 

may have regarding the screening process. According to TSA, the Pledge is a 

tangible reminder of TSA’s promise to the traveling public to provide topnotch security and customer service. The Pledge is displayed at airports and 

posted on TSA’s website. The Pledge consists of the seven following points: 
Review of TSA’s Use of Pat-downs in Screening Procedures 

Page 4 

TSA PLEDGE TO TRAVELERS 

1. We pledge to do everything we can to ensure that your flight is secure. 

2. We pledge to treat you with courtesy, dignity, and respect during the 

screening process. 

3. We pledge that if additional screening is required, we will communicate and 

explain each step of the additional screening process. 

4. We pledge to honor your request for a private screening at any time during 

the screening process. 

5. We pledge that if additional screening of your person is required, it will be 

provided by a screener of the same gender. 

6. We pledge to accept all feedback and to consider your input as a vital part of 

our effort to continually enhance the screening experience. 

7. We pledge to respond to your comments in a timely manner. 

 Pat-Down Screening Training 

Additional screening training was provided to screeners via briefings, training 

aids, videotapes, compact discs, and through TSA’s Online Learning Center. 

The training included graphical demonstrations of the general techniques for 

conducting pat-down inspections. Screeners were also provided with a script 

to follow regarding what information to tell the passengers. Along with 

training on security procedures, each screener receives training on 

professional and courteous conduct to reduce the inconvenience to the public. 

TSA recently initiated a review course for all screeners to reemphasize TSA’s 

customer service and courteous conduct goals. 

Based on our tests, screeners were professional and respectful and did not use 

unnecessary or overly intrusive pat-down methods. In addition, according to a 

TSA customer satisfaction survey, between 80% and 95% of passengers gave 

positive responses when asked about seven aspects of the federal security 

screening process, which included thoroughness and courtesy of screeners as 

well as confidence in TSA keeping air travel secure. 

According to TSA, many of the pat-down complaints involved passengers’ 

objection to the pat-down process itself, not because screeners conducted the 

pat-down inspection incorrectly or inappropriately. TSA officials said that 

screeners were adequately trained to conduct pat-down inspections in a 

professional, respectful manner, while maintaining a high level of security. 

Screeners are evaluated on their performance through written tests, annual 

certifications, covert testing conducted by TSA officials, mid-year and annual 

performance evaluations, and through observation by screening supervisors. 

Screening Checkpoint SOP are available for screeners to review to ensure that 

pat-down inspections are conducted according to SOP. 
Review of TSA’s Use of Pat-downs in Screening Procedures 

Page 5 

 Investigation and Resolution of Pat-Down Complaints 

TSA has processes to investigate and resolve pat-down complaints. TSA’s 

website provides information to passengers for contacting TSA if they believe 

the pat-down inspection was done inappropriately. Passengers can file patdown complaints with the TSA Contact Center, the External Compliance 

Division within the Office of Civil Rights, and at the airports. TSA tracks patdown complaints through its Inquiry Management System (IMS) and its 

Performance Management Information System (PMIS). Pat-down complaints 

are forwarded to the Operational Research Analysis team and the FSDs for 

further review and action. TSA monitors the number and nature of complaints 

that it receives to track trends and identify areas of concern that may require 

special attention. 

Passengers with pat-down complaints and comments may contact TSA 

through the TSA Contact Center (center) by telephone, email, or letter. The 

center reviews and evaluates all pat-down complaints and comments. The 

center employs a team of 40-50 contractors working 24 hours a day, 7 days a 

week. The center, which has pre-approved talking points to provide 

passengers with additional information on TSA’s pat-down policies and 

procedures, records pat-down complaints in IMS. Upon receipt of a pat-down 

complaint, the center contacts the complainant to acknowledge receipt of the 

complaint and notifies the complainant that the complaint will be forwarded to 

the appropriate TSA officials for investigation and resolution. The center 

forwards all pat-down complaints to the Operational Research Analysis team 

for analysis. The Operational Research Analysis team then forwards the 

complaint to the appropriate FSD for further investigation. 

Pat-down complaints that involve allegations of discrimination, based on race, 

color, national or ethnic origin, religion, or gender, are forwarded to TSA’s 

External Compliance Division, within the Office of Civil Rights. The 

External Compliance Division forwards the allegations to the appropriate 

FSDs to conduct an investigation. The Division makes an independent 

evaluation of the results of the investigation and, where appropriate, 

recommends remedial action. If the investigation indicates a possible 

systemic problem, the Division may recommend appropriate policy and 

procedural changes. Discrimination complaints received directly by the 

External Compliance Division are maintained in a separate database. 

Passengers also may file pat-down complaints or other travel related concerns 

at the airport, either in person or by completing a feedback form. Various 

TSA officials informed us that these complaint forms were readily available at 

the airport checkpoint; however, we did not observe them during our site 

visits. Pat-down complaints received by the airport are recorded in PMIS. In 

March 2005, TSA released a new PMIS version that includes a specific 
Review of TSA’s Use of Pat-downs in Screening Procedures 

Page 6 

complaint category for pat-down complaints. This PMIS revision allows TSA 

to more accurately capture the number and nature of pat-down complaints. 

FSDs are responsible for investigating and resolving pat-down complaints. 

On receipt of a pat-down complaint, FSDs or their representatives: 

(1) contact each complainant to obtain additional information regarding the 

complaint; (2) interview the screener and other airport personnel to obtain 

additional information; (3) review incident reports and security video tapes, if 

available, to determine whether the pat-down inspection was conducted 

according to SOP; and (4) recommend additional training or disciplinary 

action, if necessary. 

Our review of pat-down complaints received by TSA indicated that many of 

the complaints resulted from passengers who: were unhappy with the general 

pat-down policy; believed the pat-down inspection included inappropriate 

touching and that the search was intrusive and humiliating; had privacy 

concerns; and believed that the screeners were unprofessional or rude. We 

found no evidence that passengers were retaliated against by TSA when they 

expressed concern about the additional screening practices. 

TSA is piloting new technology to detect weapons and explosives, which 

should eventually result in fewer pat-down inspections. 
Appendix A 

Purpose, Scope, and Methodology 

Review of TSA’s Use of Pat-downs in Screening Procedures 

Page 7 

Purpose, Scope, and Methodology 

We conducted this review at the request of Congressman 

Edward J. Markey, a member of the House of Representatives, Committee 

on Homeland Security, in response to his concern that TSA screeners at 

airport checkpoints were subjecting some female travelers to intrusive patdown inspections as part of TSA’s additional screening process. 

The overall objectives of the audit were to determine whether: 

• TSA adequately advised passengers of their rights under the screening 

process, and appropriately accommodated requests related to those 

rights; 

• Additional screening practices were applied proportionately to males 

and females; 

• Screeners were adequately trained to perform pat-down inspections; 

and, 

• TSA had procedures in place for investigating and resolving 

complaints about the process. 

To accomplish our review, we conducted fieldwork at TSA headquarters 

in Arlington, Virginia. We reviewed TSA’s additional screening 

procedures, pat-down complaints, additional screening training 

information, agency reports on pat-down complaints, and other relevant 

documentation pertaining to the additional screening process. 

To obtain a thorough understanding of additional screening policies and 

procedures, we interviewed key TSA officials, including the Chief 

Operating Officer; the Ombudsman; the Director, Aviation Support, 

Aviation Operations; the Branch Chief, Office of Strategic Management 

and Analysis, Performance Management Branch; officials from the Office 

of Workforce Performance and Training; officials from Operational 

Research and Analysis; and an official from the Office of Civil Rights. 

We also interviewed the Director, Technology and Liberty Program, of the 

American Civil Liberties Union, to obtain his organization’s concerns 

regarding pat-down complaints. 

In addition we interviewed, via telephone, the FSDs at the Denver 

International Airport, the Kansas City International Airport, and the Palm 

Beach International Airport because those three airports received the most 

pat-down complaints from October 1, 2004, through February 28, 2005. 
Appendix A 

Purpose, Scope, and Methodology 

Review of TSA’s Use of Pat-downs in Screening Procedures 

Page 8 

We also interviewed, by telephone, the FSD at the Los Angeles 

International Airport (LAX) because more passengers and baggage are 

screened at LAX than any airport in the United States. Collectively, these 

four airports accounted for about 19% of all pat-down complaints received 

from October 1, 2004, through February 28, 2005. 

We observed and evaluated additional screening practices at 10 airports 

nationwide. We completed 97 questionnaires after completing the 

screening process. The questionnaire included 15 questions designed to 

determine whether screeners were conducting pat-downs according to 

revised SOP. The airports that we evaluated included: Dallas/Fort Worth 

International Airport; Honolulu International Airport; the Kansas City 

International Airport; LaGuardia Airport; Miami International Airport; the 

Norfolk International Airport; Oakland International Airport; Ronald 

Reagan Washington National Airport; San Francisco International Airport; 

and Washington-Dulles International Airport. 

We conducted fieldwork between December 2004 and March 2005 under 

the authority of the Inspector General Act of 1978, as amended, and 

according to generally accepted government auditing standards. A listing 

of the major contributors to this report is included as Appendix B. 
Appendix B 

Major Contributors To This Report 

Review of TSA’s Use of Pat-downs in Screening Procedures 

Page 9 

Major Contributors to This Report 

Alexander Best, Director, Transportation Security Audit Division 

Lynn Richardson, Audit Manager 

Eno Ukih, Auditor-In-Charge 

Mark Phillips, Auditor 
Appendix C 

Report Distribution 

Review of TSA’s Use of Pat-downs in Screening Procedures 

Page 10 

Report Distribution

Department of Homeland Security

Secretary 

Deputy Secretary 

Chief of Staff 

General Counsel 

Executive Secretariat 

Assistant Secretary, Policy 

Assistant Secretary, Public Affairs 

Office of Legislative Affairs 

Under Secretary, Border and Transportation Security 

Assistant Secretary, TSA 

Chief Operating Officer, TSA 

DHS OIG Liaison 

TSA Audit Liaison 

Office of Management and Budget

Chief, Homeland Security Branch 

DHS OIG Budget Examiner 

Congress

Congressional Oversight and Appropriations Committees as Appropriate 
Additional Information and Copies 

To obtain additional copies of this report, call the Office of Inspector General 

(OIG) at (202) 254-4100, fax your request to (202) 254-4285, or visit the OIG 

web site at www.dhs.gov/oig.

OIG Hotline 

To report alleged fraud, waste, abuse or mismanagement, or any other kind 

of criminal or noncriminal misconduct relative to department programs or 

operations, call the OIG Hotline at 1-800-323-8603; write to DHS Office of 

Inspector General/MAIL STOP 2600, Attention: Office of Investigations – 

Hotline, 245 Murray Drive, SW, Building 410, Washington, DC 20528; fax 

the complaint to (202) 254-4292; or email DHSOIGHOTLINE@dhs.gov. The 

OIG seeks to protect the identity of each writer and caller.