AIR PASSENGER 

SCREENING

Transportation Security 

Administration Needs to 

Improve Complaint 

Processes

Statement of Stephen M. Lord, Director

Homeland Security and Justice Issues

Testimony 

Before the Subcommittee on Aviation, 

Committee on Transportation and 

Infrastructure, House of 

Representatives

For Release on Delivery 

Expected at 10:00 a.m. EST 

Thursday, November 29, 2012

GAO-13-186T

United States Government Accountability Office

GAO
Page 1 GAO-13-186T 

United States Government Accountability Office

Washington, DC 20548

Chairman Petri, Ranking Member Costello, and Members of the 

Subcommittee:

I am pleased to be here to discuss the findings of our November 2012 

report assessing the Transportation Security Administration’s (TSA) 

efforts to improve the air passenger screening complaints processes.1

Given TSA’s daily interaction with members of the traveling public, air 

passenger screening complaints reflect a wide range of concerns about, 

for example, the systems, procedures, and staff that TSA has used for 

screening air passengers at security checkpoints. This includes concerns 

related to the use of Advanced Imaging Technology and enhanced patdown procedures.

TSA screens or oversees the screening of more than 650 million air 

passengers per year at 752 security checkpoints in more than 440 

commercial airports nationwide, and must attempt to balance its aviation 

security mission with competing goals of efficiency and respecting the 

privacy of the traveling public. The agency relies upon multiple layers of 

security to deter, detect, and disrupt persons posing a potential risk to 

aviation security. These layers focus on screening millions of passengers 

and pieces of carry-on and checked baggage, as well as tons of air cargo, 

on a daily basis.

2

My statement today is primarily based on our November 2012 report and, 

like the report, discusses the extent to which TSA has (1) policies and 

processes to guide the receipt of air passenger screening complaints, and 

uses this information to monitor or enhance screening operations, (2) a 

TSA has processes for addressing complaints about 

air passengers’ screening experience at security checkpoints, but 

concerns have been raised about these processes. Also, TSA is 

implementing a Pre✓TM program to expedite screening at security 

checkpoints.

 

1

GAO, Air Passenger Screening: Transportation Security Administration Could Improve 

Complaint Processes, GAO-13-43 (Washington, D.C.: Nov. 15, 2012).

2 The December 2009 terrorist attempt to detonate an explosive device during an 

international flight bound for Detroit prompted TSA to implement changes to air passenger 

screening, including accelerating the nationwide deployment of Advanced Imaging 

Technology (body scanners) and introducing enhanced pat-down procedures in October 

2010 to screen air passengers who, for example, opt out of Advanced Imaging 

Technology-based screening.

 
 

Page 2 GAO-13-186T 

consistent process for informing passengers about how to make 

complaints, and (3) complaint resolution processes that conform to 

independence standards to help ensure that these processes are fair and 

impartial.3

For our November 2012 report, we obtained and analyzed air passenger 

screening complaint data from October 2009 through June 2012 from four 

TSA headquarters units.

As requested, my statement also describes TSA’s recent 

efforts to make the screening process more risk-based and selective 

through use of TSA’s Pre✓TM program.

4 In addition, we obtained and analyzed air 

passenger screening complaint data from April 2011 through June 2012 

from a database TSA uses to document screening complaints collected 

through TSA’s Talk to TSA web-based portal.5

 

3

On the basis of information 

from and discussions with TSA officials related to the controls in place to 

maintain the integrity of TSA’s complaint data, we determined that the 

data from each database were sufficiently reliable for our purposes. We 

also reviewed TSA documentation and interviewed TSA officials from 

headquarters offices and 6 airports selected for the type of security and 

screening equipment used, among other things. The airport interviews are 

not generalizable, but provide insights. Additional details on the scope 

and methodology, including our assessment of data reliability, can be 

found within that report. To obtain information about TSA’s Pre✓TM 

program, we analyzed TSA program documentation, interviewed TSA 

officials, and reviewed TSA’s website information in November 2012. We 

discussed this information with TSA officials and incorporated their 

technical comments as appropriate. We conducted all of this work in 

accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards. 

Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain 

sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for our 

findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives. We believe that 

GAO-13-43. 

4

The TSA units are the TSA Contact Center, the Office of the Executive Secretariat, the 

Disability Branch, and the Multicultural Branch. We selected October 2009 as the starting 

point because it was the first month of the fiscal year that included the December 2009 

terrorist attempt to detonate an explosive device during an international flight bound for 

Detroit, which prompted TSA to implement changes to its air passenger screening 

operations.

5

This database became operational in April 2011, according to TSA officials. 
 

Page 3 GAO-13-186T 

the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for our findings based 

on our audit objectives.

In summary, TSA receives thousands of air passenger screening 

complaints through five central mechanisms, but does not have an 

agencywide policy, consistent processes, or a focal point to guide receipt 

and use of such information. Also, while the agency has several methods 

to inform passengers about its complaint processes, it does not have an 

agencywide policy or mechanism to ensure consistent use of these 

methods among commercial airports. In addition, TSA’s complaint 

resolution processes do not fully conform to standards of independence 

to ensure that these processes are fair, impartial, and credible, but the 

agency is taking steps to improve independence. To address these 

issues, we made four recommendations to TSA with which the agency 

concurred, and it indicated actions it is taking in response. Finally, TSA 

officials stated that the agency is undertaking efforts to focus its 

resources and improve the passenger experience at security checkpoints 

by applying new intelligence-driven, risk-based screening procedures, 

including expanding its Pre✓TM program. TSA plans to have this program 

in place at 35 airports by the end of the calendar year and estimates that 

it has screened more than 4 million passengers to date through this 

program.
 

Page 4 GAO-13-186T 

TSA receives thousands of air passenger screening complaints through 

five centralized mechanisms but does not have an agencywide policy, 

consistent processes, or an agency focal point to guide the receipt of 

these complaints, or “mine” these data to inform management about the 

nature and extent of the screening complaints to help improve screening 

operations and customer service.6

• From October 2009 through June 2012, TSA received more than 

39,000 screening complaints through its TSA Contact Center (TCC), 

including more than 17,000 complaints about pat-down procedures.

For example, TSA data indicate the 

following:

7

• From October 2009 through June 2012, TSA’s Office of the Executive 

Secretariat received approximately 4,000 complaints that air 

passengers submitted by mail.

• From April 2011 (when it was launched) through June 2012, the 

agency’s Talk to TSA web-based mechanism received approximately 

4,500 air passenger screening complaints, including 1,512 complaints 

about the professionalism of TSA staff during the screening process.8

However, the data from the five centralized mechanisms do not reflect the 

full nature and extent of complaints because local TSA staff have 

discretion in implementing TSA’s complaint processes, including how they 

receive and document complaints. For example, comment cards were 

used in varying ways at 6 airports we contacted.9

 

6

TSA’s five centralized mechanisms include TSA’s Contact Center, Office of the Executive 

Secretariat, Disability Branch, Multicultural Branch, and Talk to TSA web-based 

mechanism.

Specifically, customer 

comment cards were not used at 2 of these airports, were on display at 2 

airports, and were available upon request at the remaining 2 airports we 

contacted. TSA does not have a policy requiring that complaints 

submitted using the cards be tracked or reported centrally.

7

The TCC receives, documents, and helps resolve screening complaints that air 

passengers make by telephone or e-mail. The TCC is TSA’s primary point of contact for 

collecting, documenting, and responding to public questions, concerns, or complaints 

regarding, among other things, TSA security policies, procedures, and programs.

8

For further information on the complaint data from TSA’s five centralized mechanisms, 

see GAO-13-43. 

9

We visited 4 of the 6 airports that we contacted.

Lack of an 

Agencywide Policy, 

Consistent Processes, 

and Agency Focal 

Point Limits TSA’s 

Ability to Receive and 

Use Complaint 

Information
 

Page 5 GAO-13-186T 

We concluded that a consistent policy to guide all TSA efforts to receive 

and document complaints would improve TSA’s oversight of these 

activities and help ensure consistent implementation. TSA also uses TCC 

data to inform the public about air passenger screening complaints, 

monitor operational effectiveness of airport security checkpoints, and 

make changes as needed. However, TSA does not use data from its 

other four mechanisms, in part because the complaint categories differ, 

making data consolidation difficult. A process to systematically collect 

information from all mechanisms, including standard complaint 

categories, would better enable TSA to improve operations and customer 

service. Further, at the time of our review, TSA had not designated a focal 

point for coordinating agencywide policy and processes related to 

receiving, tracking, documenting, reporting, and acting on screening 

complaints. Without a focal point at TSA headquarters, the agency does 

not have a centralized entity to guide and coordinate these processes, or 

to suggest any additional refinements to the system.

To address these weaknesses, we recommended that TSA

• establish a consistent policy to guide agencywide efforts for receiving, 

tracking, and reporting air passenger screening complaints;

• establish a process to systematically compile and analyze information 

on air passenger screening complaints from all complaint 

mechanisms; and

• designate a focal point to develop and coordinate agencywide policy 

on screening complaint processes, guide the analysis and use of the 

agency’s screening complaint data, and inform the public about the 

nature and extent of screening complaints.

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) concurred with the 

recommendations and indicated actions that TSA had taken, had 

underway, and was planning to take in response. For example, DHS 

stated that TSA would review current intake and processing procedures 

at headquarters and in the field and develop policy, as appropriate, to 

better guide the complaint receipt, tracking, and reporting processes. We 

believe that these are beneficial steps that would address the 

recommendation, provided that the resulting policy refinements improve 

the existing processes for receiving, tracking, and reporting all air 

passenger screening complaints, including the screening complaints that 

air passengers submit locally at airports through comment cards or in 

person at security checkpoints.
 

Page 6 GAO-13-186T 

In commenting on a draft of our November 2012 report, TSA also stated 

that the agency began channeling information from the Talk to TSA 

database to the TCC in October 2012. However, DHS did not specify in 

its letter whether TSA will compile and analyze data from the Talk to TSA 

database and its other centralized mechanisms in its efforts to inform the 

public about the nature and extent of screening complaints, and whether 

these efforts will include data on screening complaints submitted locally at 

airports through customer comment cards or in person at airport security 

checkpoints. DHS also did not provide sufficient detail for us to assess 

whether TSA’s planned actions will address the difficulties we identified in 

collecting standardized screening data across different complaint 

categories and mechanisms. DHS stated that the Assistant Administrator 

for the Office of Civil Rights & Liberties, Ombudsman and Traveler 

Engagement was now the focal point for overseeing the key TSA entities 

involved with processing passenger screening complaints. It will be 

important for the Assistant Administrator to work closely with, among 

others, the office of the Assistant Administrator of Security Operations 

because this office oversees screening operations at commercial airports 

and security operations staff in the field who receive screening complaints 

submitted through customer comment cards or in person at airport 

security checkpoints. We will continue to monitor TSA’s progress in 

implementing these recommendations.

TSA has several methods to inform passengers about its complaint 

processes, but does not have an agencywide policy or mechanism to 

ensure consistent use of these methods among commercial airports. For 

example, TSA has developed standard signs, stickers, and customer 

comment cards that can be used at airport checkpoints to inform 

passengers about how to submit feedback to TSA; however, we found 

inconsistent use at the 6 airports we contacted.

For example, customer comment cards were displayed in the checkpoints 

at 2 airports, while at 2 others the cards were provided upon request. 

However, we found that passengers may be reluctant to ask for such 

cards, according to TSA. TSA officials at 4 of the 6 airports also said that 

the agency could do more to share best practices for informing 

passengers about complaint processes. For example, TSA holds periodic 

conference calls for its Customer Support Managers—TSA staff at certain 

commercial airports who work in conjunction with other local TSA staff to 

resolve customer complaints and communicate the status and resolution 

of complaints to air passengers—to discuss customer service. However, 

Customer Support Managers have not used this mechanism to discuss 

TSA Has Several 

Methods to Inform Air 

Passengers about 

Making Screening 

Complaints, but Does 

Not Consistently 

Implement Them
 

Page 7 GAO-13-186T 

best practices for informing air passengers about processes for 

submitting complaints, according to the officials we interviewed. Policies 

for informing the public about complaint processes and mechanisms for 

sharing best practices among local TSA officials could help provide TSA 

reasonable assurance that these activities are being conducted 

consistently and help local TSA officials learn from one another about 

what practices work well.

We recommended that TSA establish an agencywide policy to guide its 

efforts to inform air passengers about the screening complaint processes 

and establish mechanisms, particularly at the airport level, to share 

information on best practices for informing air passengers about the 

screening complaint processes. DHS concurred with the recommendation 

and stated that TSA would develop a policy to better inform air 

passengers about the screening complaint processes. We will continue to 

monitor TSA’s progress in implementing this recommendation.

TSA’s complaint resolution processes do not fully conform to standards of 

independence to ensure that these processes are fair, impartial, and 

credible, but the agency is taking steps to improve independence. 

Specifically, TSA airport officials responsible for resolving air passenger 

complaints are generally in the same chain of command as TSA airport 

staff who are the subjects of the complaints. While TSA has an 

Ombudsman Division that could help ensure greater independence in the 

complaint processes, the division primarily focuses on handling internal 

personnel matters and is not yet fully equipped to address external 

complaints from air passengers, according to the head of the division.

TSA is developing a new process for referring air passenger complaints 

directly to the Ombudsman Division from airports and for providing air 

passengers an independent avenue to make complaints about airport 

security checkpoint screening. In August 2012, TSA’s Ombudsman 

Division began addressing a small number of air passenger complaints 

forwarded from the TCC, according to the head of that division. TSA also 

began advertising the division’s new role in addressing passenger 

screening complaints via the TSA website in October 2012. According to 

the Assistant Administrator of TSA’s Office of Civil Rights & Liberties, 

Ombudsman and Traveler Engagement, the division will not handle 

complaints for which there exists an established process that includes an 

appeals function, such as disability complaints or other civil rights or civil 

liberties complaints, in order to avoid duplication of currently established 

processes. According to the Assistant Administrator, the agency also 

TSA’s Complaint 

Resolution Processes 

Do Not Fully Conform 

to Standards of 

Independence, but 

TSA Is Taking Steps 

to Increase 

Independence 
 

Page 8 GAO-13-186T 

plans to initiate a Passenger Advocate Program by January 2013, in 

which selected TSA airport staff will be trained to take on a collateral 

passenger advocate role, respond in real time to identify and resolve 

traveler-related screening complaints, and assist air passengers with 

medical conditions or disabilities, among other things. It is too early to 

assess the extent to which these initiatives will help mitigate possible

concerns about independence.

TSA officials stated that the agency is undertaking efforts to focus its 

resources and improve the passenger experience at security checkpoints 

by applying new intelligence-driven, risk-based screening procedures and 

enhancing its use of technology.

One component of TSA’s risk-based approach to passenger screening is 

the Pre✓TM program, which was introduced at 32 airports in 2012, and 

which the agency plans to expand to 3 additional airports by the end of 

the calendar year. The program allows frequent flyers of five airlines, as 

well as individuals enrolled in other departmental trusted traveler 

programs—where passengers are pre-vetted and deemed trusted 

travelers—to be screened on an expedited basis. This program is 

intended to allow TSA to focus its resources on high-risk travelers. 

According to TSA, more than 4 million passengers have been screened 

through this program to date. Agency officials have reported that with the 

deployment of this program and other risk-based security initiatives, such 

as modifying screening procedures for passengers 75 and over and 

active duty service members, TSA has achieved its stated goal of 

doubling the number of passengers going through expedited screening. 

According to TSA, as of the end of fiscal year 2012, over 7 percent of 

daily passengers were eligible for expedited screening based on low risk. 

However, the estimated number of passengers that will be screened on 

an expedited basis is still a relatively small percentage of air passengers 

subject to TSA screening protocols each year. We plan to begin an 

assessment of TSA’s progress in implementing the TSA Pre✓TM program 

in 2013.10

 

10This work is at the request of the Chairmen of the Subcommittees on Transportation 

Security and Oversight, Investigations, and Management of the Committee on Homeland 

Security, House of Representatives.

TSA Is Expanding Its 

Risk-Based Programs, 

Including the Pre✓TM 

Program 
 

Page 9 GAO-13-186T 

Chairman Petri, Ranking Member Costello, and Members of the 

Subcommittee, this concludes my prepared remarks. I look forward to 

responding to any questions that you may have.

For questions about this statement, please contact Steve Lord at (202) 

512-4379 or lords@gao.gov. Contact points for our Offices of 

Congressional Relations and Public Affairs may be found on the last page 

of this statement. Individuals making key contributions to this statement 

include Jessica Lucas-Judy (Assistant Director), David Alexander, 

Thomas Lombardi, Anthony Pordes, and Juan Tapia-Videla.

GAO Contact and 

Staff 

Acknowledgments 

(441120)
This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright protection in the 

United States. The published product may be reproduced and distributed in its entirety 

without further permission from GAO. However, because this work may contain 

copyrighted images or other material, permission from the copyright holder may be 

necessary if you wish to reproduce this material separately.
The Government Accountability Office, the audit, evaluation, and 

investigative arm of Congress, exists to support Congress in meeting its 

constitutional responsibilities and to help improve the performance and 

accountability of the federal government for the American people. GAO 

examines the use of public funds; evaluates federal programs and 

policies; and provides analyses, recommendations, and other assistance 

to help Congress make informed oversight, policy, and funding decisions. 

GAO’s commitment to good government is reflected in its core values of 

accountability, integrity, and reliability.

The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no 

cost is through GAO’s website (http://www.gao.gov). Each weekday 

afternoon, GAO posts on its website newly released reports, testimony, 

and correspondence. To have GAO e-mail you a list of newly posted 

products, go to http://www.gao.gov and select “E-mail Updates.”

The price of each GAO publication reflects GAO’s actual cost of 

production and distribution and depends on the number of pages in the 

publication and whether the publication is printed in color or black and 

white. Pricing and ordering information is posted on GAO’s website, 

http://www.gao.gov/ordering.htm. 

Place orders by calling (202) 512-6000, toll free (866) 801-7077, or 

TDD (202) 512-2537.

Orders may be paid for using American Express, Discover Card, 

MasterCard, Visa, check, or money order. Call for additional information.

Connect with GAO on Facebook, Flickr, Twitter, and YouTube. 

Subscribe to our RSS Feeds or E-mail Updates. Listen to our Podcasts. 

Visit GAO on the web at www.gao.gov. 

Contact:

Website: http://www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm

E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov

Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470

Katherine Siggerud, Managing Director, siggerudk@gao.gov, (202) 512-

4400, U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 

7125, Washington, DC 20548

Chuck Young, Managing Director, youngc1@gao.gov, (202) 512-4800

U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7149 

Washington, DC 20548

GAO’s Mission

Obtaining Copies of 

GAO Reports and 

Testimony 

Order by Phone

Connect with GAO

To Report Fraud, 

Waste, and Abuse in 

Federal Programs

Congressional 

Relations 

Public Affairs

Please Print on Recycled Paper.