AIR PASSENGER 

SCREENING

Transportation 

Security

Administration Could 

Improve Complaint 

Processes

Report to Congressional Committees

November 2012

GAO-13-43

United States Government Accountability Office

GAO
United States Government Accountability Office

Highlights of GAO-13-43, a report to 

congressional committees 

November 2012 

AIR PASSENGER SCREENING

Transportation Security Administration Could 

Improve Complaint Processes

Why GAO Did This Study

TSA, which screens or oversees the 

screening of over 650 million air 

passengers per year, has processes 

for addressing complaints about air 

passengers’ screening experience at 

checkpoints, but concerns have been 

raised about these processes. The

Conference Report accompanying the 

Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2012, 

directed TSA to ensure the traveling 

public is aware of these processes and

GAO to review TSA’s policies and 

procedures for resolving passenger 

complaints. This report addresses the 

extent to which TSA has (1) policies 

and processes to guide the receipt of 

air passenger screening complaints 

and use of this information to monitor 

or enhance screening operations, (2) a 

consistent process for informing 

passengers about how to make 

complaints, and (3) complaint 

resolution processes that conform to 

independence standards. To address 

these objectives, GAO reviewed TSA 

documentation, analyzed complaint 

data from October 2009 through June 

2012, and interviewed TSA officials 

from headquarters offices and six 

airports selected for type of security, 

among other things. The airport 

interviews are not generalizable but 

provide insights. 

What GAO Recommends

GAO recommends that TSA, among 

other actions, establish (1) a consistent 

policy for receiving complaints, (2) a 

process to systematically analyze 

information on complaints from all 

mechanisms, and (3) a policy for 

informing passengers about the 

screening complaint processes and 

mechanisms to share best practices 

among airports. TSA concurred and is 

taking actions in response. 

What GAO Found

The Transportation Security Administration (TSA) receives thousands of air 

passenger screening complaints through five mechanisms, but does not have an 

agencywide policy or consistent processes to guide receipt and use of such 

information. For example, from October 2009 through June 2012, TSA received 

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

However, the data from the five 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 are used at four of the six airports GAO 

contacted, but TSA does not have a policy requiring that complaints submitted 

using the cards be tracked or reported centrally. 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. 

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, GAO found inconsistent use at the six airports it contacted. For 

example, two airports displayed customer comment cards at the checkpoint, 

while at two others the cards were provided upon request. Passengers may be 

reluctant to ask for such cards, however, according to TSA. TSA officials at four 

of the six airports also said that the agency could do more to share best practices 

for informing passengers about complaint processes. 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.

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. TSA is developing a new process that could help ensure greater 

independence by TSA units referring air passenger complaints directly to its 

Ombudsman Division and by providing passengers an independent avenue to 

make complaints to that division. TSA also plans to initiate a program by January 

2013 in which selected TSA airport staff are to be trained as passenger 

advocates as a collateral duty. It is too early to assess the extent to which these 

initiatives will help mitigate possible concerns about independence.

View GAO-13-43. For more information, 

contact Stephen M. Lord at (202) 512-4379 or 

lords@gao.gov. 
Page i GAO-13-43 Air Passenger Screening Complaints 

Letter 1 

Background 6

Lack of an Agencywide Policy, Consistent Processes, and Agency 

Focal Point Limits TSA’s Ability to Receive and Use Complaint 

Information 14

TSA Has Several Methods to Inform Air Passengers about Making 

Screening Complaints, but Does Not Consistently Implement 

Them 27

TSA’s Complaint Resolution Process Lacks Independence, but TSA 

Is Taking Steps to Increase Independence 31

Conclusions 36

Recommendations for Executive Action 37

Agency Comments and Our Evaluation 38

Appendix I Comments from the Department of Homeland Security 42

Appendix II GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments 45

Figures

Figure 1: TSA Headquarters Units and Local TSA Airport Staff 

Responsible for Receiving and Addressing Air Passenger 

Screening Complaints 7

Figure 2: Example of TSA Customer Comment Card 10

Figure 3: Numbers of Monthly Air Passenger Screening Complaints 

That TSA Received from October 2009 through June 2012 15

Figure 4: Total Numbers of Air Passenger Screening Complaints 

That the TCC Received from October 2009 through June 

2012, by Category 17

Figure 5: Numbers of Air Passenger Screening Complaints That the 

TCC Received from October 2009 through June 2012, by 

Category (Four Largest Categories) 18

Figure 6: Numbers of Air Passenger Screening Complaints That the 

Multicultural Branch Processed as Cases from October 

2009 through June 2012, by Category 19

Figure 7: Numbers of Air Passenger Screening Complaints That the 

Disability Branch Processed as Cases from October 2009 

through June 2012, by Category 21

Contents
Page ii GAO-13-43 Air Passenger Screening Complaints 

Figure 8: Numbers of Air Passenger Screening Complaints That 

Talk to TSA Received from April 2011 through June 2012, 

by Category 22

Figure 9: Examples of TSA Efforts to Inform Air Passengers about 

Procedures for Making Screening Complaints 28

Figure 10: Simplified Organizational Chart Depicting TSA Chain of 

Command at a Typical Category X Airport 34

Abbreviations

AFSD Assistant Federal Security Director

ATSA Aviation and Transportation Security Act

CSQIM Customer Support and Quality Improvement Manager 

DHS U.S. Department of Homeland Security

FSD Federal Security Director

GSA U.S. General Services Administration

SPOT Screening of Passengers by Observation Techniques

SPP Screening Partnership Program

TCC TSA Contact Center

TSA Transportation Security Administration

TSO Transportation Security Officer 

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.
Page 1 GAO-13-43 Air Passenger Screening Complaints 

United States Government Accountability Office 

Washington, DC 20548

November 15, 2012

Congressional Committees

The Transportation Security Administration (TSA), established by the 

Aviation and Transportation Security Act (ATSA), provides for, or 

oversees the provision of, security screening operations at the nation’s 

commercial airports.1 In accordance with ATSA, all air passengers and 

their accessible property must pass through a security checkpoint and 

undergo screening before entering the sterile area of an airport.2

 

1

See Pub. L. No. 107-71, 115 Stat. 597 (2001). For this report, we use the term “air 

passengers” to include ticketed passengers, individuals accompanying ticketed 

passengers, airline crew members, and any other individuals who pass through security 

checkpoints employing TSA-approved screening procedures at TSA-regulated airports. In 

this report, we use the term “commercial airports” to refer to all TSA-regulated airports 

operating under TSA-approved security programs in accordance with 49 C.F.R. pt. 1542 

and at which TSA or private sector screeners who are subject to TSA oversight screen air 

passengers and their property.

 TSA 

currently screens or oversees the screening of over 650 million air 

passengers per year at 752 security checkpoints at over 440 commercial 

airports nationwide. 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 

(commonly referred to as a full body scanner, which screens air 

passengers for weapons, explosives, and other objects concealed under 

layers of clothing) and introducing enhanced pat-down procedures to 

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

Technology-based screening. Air passenger screening complaints reflect 

a wide range of concerns, including those related to the use of Advanced 

Imaging Technology and concerns about enhanced pat-down procedures 

2

The sterile area is that portion of an airport specified in the airport security program that 

provides passengers access to boarding aircraft and to which the access generally is 

controlled through the screening of persons and property. See 49 C.F.R. § 1540.5.

 
 

Page 2 GAO-13-43 Air Passenger Screening Complaints 

being unnecessarily intrusive.3

The Conference Report accompanying the Consolidated Appropriations 

Act, 2012, directed TSA to make every effort to ensure that members of 

the traveling public are aware of the procedures and processes for 

making complaints about air passenger screening.

TSA has various processes for receiving 

and resolving complaints that air passengers may have about their 

screening experience at security checkpoints; however, public concerns 

have been raised about these processes.

4

To address the first objective, we reviewed TSA documentation on the 

processes for receiving and documenting complaints at different offices 

within TSA headquarters and locally at airports. We also obtained 

documentation on TSA’s use of air passenger screening complaints, such 

as complaint data that TSA provides to the U.S. Department of 

Transportation for publication in its monthly Air Travel Consumer Report. 

We interviewed officials from TSA, the U.S. Department of Homeland 

Security (DHS), and a nonprobability sample of eight aviation industry 

The Conference 

Report also directed that we review TSA’s policies and procedures for 

resolving passenger complaints, including an assessment of 

organizational independence. In response, this report addresses the 

following questions: (1) To what extent does TSA have policies and 

processes in place to guide the receipt of air passenger screening 

complaints and use this information to monitor or enhance screening 

operations? (2) To what extent does TSA have a consistent process for 

informing air passengers about how to make screening complaints? (3) 

To what extent does TSA have complaint resolution processes that 

conform to standards of independence to ensure that these processes 

are fair, impartial, and credible?

 

3

For purposes of this review, “screening complaints” include any documented expression 

of dissatisfaction or request for redress that TSA or its contractors receive orally (and that 

is subsequently documented) or in writing at the airport checkpoints or through mail, email, telephone, agency websites, or other means, related to agency and contractor 

screening systems, procedures, and staff deployed at airport security checkpoints. 

Complaints about prescreening of air passengers through the Department of Homeland 

Security’s Traveler Redress Inquiry Program, complaints about screening of checked

baggage, and air passenger claims for lost, stolen, and damaged property are not 

included in our scope. 

4

See H.R. Rep. No. 112-331, at 975 (2011) (accompanying H.R. 2055, 112th Cong. (1st 

Sess. 2011), enacted as the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2012, Pub. L. No. 112-74, 

125 Stat. 786 (2011)).
 

Page 3 GAO-13-43 Air Passenger Screening Complaints 

groups to obtain their perspectives on TSA’s processes for receiving and 

documenting air passenger screening complaints and for using this 

information to monitor or enhance screening operations.5 The views of 

these industry groups are not generalizable to all members of the aviation 

industry but provided us with additional perspective and insights. The 

groups were selected to include organizations representing airlines, 

airports, travel agencies, and travelers, among others. In addition, we 

interviewed officials from the U.S. Department of Transportation’s 

Aviation Consumer Protection Division. We also obtained and analyzed 

air passenger screening complaint data from October 2009 through June 

2012 from four TSA headquarters units.6 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. 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.7

In addition, we selected a nonprobability sample of six airports—including 

one airport participating in TSA’s Screening Partnership Program (SPP)—

at which to interview TSA airport officials (and contractors’ 

representatives) about their processes for receiving and documenting air 

This database became operational in April 2011, 

according to TSA officials. 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.

 

5

The TSA offices include the following: Office of Security Operations; Office of Civil Rights 

& Liberties, Ombudsman, and Traveler Engagement; Office of the Executive Secretariat; 

Office of Public Affairs; Office of Inspections; and Office of Legislative Affairs. The DHS 

offices include the Office of Civil Rights & Civil Liberties, the Privacy Office, and the Office 

of the Inspector General. The aviation industry groups include Airlines for America; 

Airports Council International-North America; American Association of Airport Executives; 

Business Travel Coalition, Inc.; FlyersRights.Org; Global Business Travel Association; 

Regional Airline Association; and U.S. Travel Association.

6

These units are the TSA Contact Center Branch, the Office of the Executive Secretariat, 

the Disability Branch, and the Multicultural Branch.

7

This portal, which resides on TSA’s website, e-mails screening complaint information 

directly to designated TSA airport staff.
 

Page 4 GAO-13-43 Air Passenger Screening Complaints 

passenger screening complaints and for using this information to inform 

screening operations and improve customer service.8 We also obtained 

supporting documentation and data from officials at these six airports. We 

selected these airports based on airport security category9 and types of 

screening equipment and initiatives at the airports, such as the use of 

Advanced Imaging Technology and TSA’s enhanced behavior detection 

pilot program.10 The selected airports are located in the Washington, 

D.C.; Detroit; and Los Angeles metropolitan areas; and the SPP airport is 

located in the San Francisco metropolitan area. We visited and observed 

security checkpoints at four of the airports.11

 

8

In general, TSA employees (referred to as Transportation Security Officers) perform the 

screening function at the nation’s commercial airports. Through SPP, however, employees 

of private companies under contract to TSA perform the screening function, following the 

same screening procedures at checkpoints used by Transportation Security Officers. See 

49 U.S.C. § 44920. Sixteen airports currently participate in SPP, with six additional 

airports approved in fiscal year 2012 for participation in the program. We are currently 

conducting a separate review of SPP and plan to report on the results of this work later 

this year.

At the five airports where 

TSA performs the screening function, we interviewed TSA Federal 

Security Director (FSD) staff responsible for screening and customer 

service, such as TSA screening supervisors and managers and TSA 

Customer Support Managers. At the SPP airport, we interviewed TSA 

FSD staff responsible for customer service and contractor officials 

responsible for screening. While the information gathered from the 

interviews cannot be generalized to all commercial airports, it provided 

important perspective to our analysis of air passenger screening 

complaint processes, which is focused on airports at which TSA staff 

conduct screening. At the TSA headquarters units and airports we 

9

TSA classifies the nation’s commercial airports into one of five categories (X, I, II, III, and 

IV) based on various factors such as the number of takeoffs and landings annually, the 

extent of passenger screening at the airport, and other security considerations. In general, 

category X airports have the largest number of passenger boardings and category IV 

airports have the smallest. 

10We have ongoing work reviewing TSA’s Screening of Passengers by Observation 

Techniques (SPOT) program and its enhanced behavior detection pilot program and plan 

to report the results of this work in early 2013. The SPOT program is a behavior 

observation and analysis program designed to provide the TSA Behavior Detection 

Officers who interact with air passengers at the security checkpoints with a means of 

identifying persons who pose or may pose potential transportation security risks by 

focusing on behaviors indicative of high levels of stress, fear, or deception.

11We interviewed staff from the other two airports, including the SPP airport, by phone, 

and therefore did not visit checkpoints at those airports.
 

Page 5 GAO-13-43 Air Passenger Screening Complaints 

interviewed, we compared TSA’s processes for receiving and 

documenting air passenger screening complaints and for using the 

information to monitor and enhance screening operations and improve 

customer service against Standards for Internal Control in the Federal 

Government.

12

To address the second objective, we reviewed TSA documentation on 

how the agency informs passengers about its air passenger complaint 

processes, such as agency guidance, website information, comment 

cards, and signs. We also interviewed officials at TSA and the selected 

airports about the agency’s methods for informing air passengers about 

TSA’s processes for making screening complaints (and about TSA’s 

contractor’s complaint processes). We compared these methods with 

Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government.

13

To address the third objective, we obtained and analyzed TSA guidance 

for resolving air passenger screening complaints, as well as the 

organizational structure of TSA offices responsible for resolving screening 

complaints. We compared this information with pertinent criteria from 

Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government and other 

standards for independence, such as ombudsman standards for 

governmental organizations,14

We conducted this performance audit from February 2012 to November

2012 in accordance with generally accepted government auditing 

to assess the extent to which TSA’s 

screening complaint resolution processes are independent from those 

responsible for conducting screening at airport checkpoints so as to 

ensure that these processes are fair, impartial, and credible. We 

interviewed TSA officials responsible for resolving screening complaints, 

including customer support managers at the selected airports, as well as 

aviation industry group representatives. We also interviewed TSA officials 

about the agency’s plans for creating an external ombudsman function to 

resolve screening complaints.

 

12GAO, Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government, GAO/AIMD-00-21.3.1

(Washington, D.C.: November 1999).

13GAO/AIMD-00-21.3.1. 

14GAO/AIMD-00-21.3.1; American Bar Association, Revised Standards for the 

Establishment and Operation of Ombuds Offices (February 2004); and United States 

Ombudsman Association, Governmental Ombudsman Standards, (Dayton, OH: October 

2003).
 

Page 6 GAO-13-43 Air Passenger Screening Complaints 

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 the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for our findings 

and conclusions based on our audit objectives.

TSA has various processes for receiving and addressing air passenger 

complaints about the screening systems, procedures, and personnel at 

airport security checkpoints.15 Specifically, several TSA headquarters 

units and local TSA airport staff have responsibility and processes for 

receiving and addressing these complaints, and, if necessary, referring 

these complaints to other TSA offices for resolution.16 Figure 1 depicts the 

four primary TSA headquarters units and the local TSA airport staff who 

are responsible for receiving and addressing air passenger screening 

complaints.17

 

15Complaint processes at the airport level differ somewhat between airports at which TSA 

has direct responsibility for screening and SPP airports. For example, while screeners at 

both types of airports follow the same standard operating procedures for screening air 

passengers, the contractor responsible for screening at the SPP airport also has general 

responsibility for addressing complaints submitted to the contractor at the checkpoint, 

while TSA staff at that airport are generally responsible for addressing complaints 

submitted through TSA’s Contact Center or the Talk to TSA web-based portal. For the 

purposes of this report, we are referring to airports at which TSA has direct responsibility 

for screening in discussions of roles, responsibilities, and processes for addressing 

complaints at the airport level.

16When airport authorities, airlines, and other federal agencies, such as the U.S. 

Department of Transportation, receive air passenger screening complaints, they typically 

refer them to TSA, according to officials that we contacted at these entities.

17Other TSA headquarters offices can also play a role in addressing screening complaints. 

For instance, the Office of Legislative Affairs handles congressional inquiries and 

correspondence that relate to screening complaints. As we discuss later in this report, the 

TSA Ombudsman is working on an initiative to begin addressing screening complaints. In 

addition, we discussed the TSA Contact Center’s customer service efforts in GAO, 

Managing for Results: Opportunities to Strengthen Agencies’ Customer Service Efforts, 

GAO-11-44 (Washington, D.C.: Oct. 27, 2010).

Background

Roles and Responsibilities 

for Receiving and 

Addressing Screening 

Complaints
 

Page 7 GAO-13-43 Air Passenger Screening Complaints 

Figure 1: TSA Headquarters Units and Local TSA Airport Staff Responsible for Receiving and Addressing Air Passenger 

Screening Complaints
 

Page 8 GAO-13-43 Air Passenger Screening Complaints 

Note: According to TSA officials, if air passengers cannot submit screening complaints in writing 

because of disability, medical condition, or language barrier, the Disability and Multicultural Branches 

will accept their complaints by telephone or other means and then create written versions of the 

complaints for processing. 

As highlighted in figure 1, the TSA Contact Center (TCC) receives, 

documents, and helps resolve screening complaints that air passengers 

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

for collecting, documenting, and responding to public questions, 

concerns, or complaints regarding TSA security policies, procedures, and 

programs; reports and claims of lost, stolen, or damaged items; and 

employment issues.18

At the local level, TSA screening supervisors and managers oversee 

screening systems, procedures, and Transportation Security Officers at 

the airport security checkpoints and are responsible for receiving and 

addressing complaints that air passengers orally submit as they proceed 

through the checkpoints.19 TSA customer service representatives are 

responsible for receiving and addressing screening complaints that air 

passengers make through customer comment cards, telephone calls, or a 

Talk to TSA web-based feedback form.20

 

18The TCC addresses inquiries from air passengers on claims for damaged, lost, or stolen 

property and advises these passengers on how to file a claim when appropriate. However, 

it is the Claims Management Branch and the Office of the Chief Counsel that resolve 

these claims.

(See an example of a customer 

comment card in fig. 2.) The customer service representatives serve as 

the primary TSA representatives at the airports for all customer service 

initiatives, including customer complaint resolution activities. Some of 

these representatives are Customer Support Managers, which are fulltime positions at category X airports and an ancillary duty of the FSD or 

19These officials include Lead and Supervisory Transportation Security Officers as well as 

Transportation Security Managers. At SPP airports, they include supervisory contractor 

officials. FSDs and Assistant Federal Security Directors are responsible for overseeing 

TSA security programs at all commercial airports. According to the Assistant Administrator 

of TSA’s Office of Civil Rights & Liberties, Ombudsman and Traveler Engagement, the 

agency is working on an initiative under which an unspecified number of TSA staff will 

receive training as “passenger advocates” and begin working in this capacity to address 

air passenger complaints at security checkpoints by January 2013. 

20According to TSA officials, air passengers may submit other written screening 

complaints to customer service representatives by mail using the information for mailing 

customer comment cards. Also, air passengers may submit screening complaints to these 

representatives by e-mail, although the e-mail contact information for these 

representatives is not always provided in the customer comment cards. 
 

Page 9 GAO-13-43 Air Passenger Screening Complaints 

screener staff at other commercial airports.21 Customer Support 

Managers work in conjunction with other FSD staff to resolve customer 

complaints and communicate the status and resolution of complaints to 

air passengers. They are also responsible for ensuring security 

procedures and practices are consistently and effectively communicated 

to air passengers, to the extent permitted by law and regulation.

22

 

21The official title for this position is Customer Support and Quality Improvement Manager 

(CSQIM) but it is commonly referred to as Customer Support Manager. TSA had 115

Customer Support Managers as of October 2012.

22In addition to Customer Support Managers, some airports may also have TSA 

Stakeholder Relations Managers, who deal primarily with airlines, local law enforcement, 

and airport tenants. The Stakeholder Relations Manager is not directly tied to customer 

service, but depending on the airport, may have a customer support role, according to 

TSA and airport officials we interviewed. The type and number of positions as well as the 

reporting structure of these positions varies at each airport based on the size of the airport 

and passenger numbers, according to TSA officials.
 

Page 10 GAO-13-43 Air Passenger Screening Complaints 

Figure 2: Example of TSA Customer Comment Card
 

Page 11 GAO-13-43 Air Passenger Screening Complaints 

TSA has an operations directive that specifies roles, responsibilities, and 

time frames for resolving and responding to screening complaints that air 

passengers submit to the TCC and FSD staff.23 This directive does not 

apply to complaints received through other mechanisms, as we discuss 

later in this report. The agency has also given TSA headquarters units 

and FSDs discretion in addressing these complaints at airports under 

their jurisdiction, according to TSA officials. This operations directive 

provides instructions for processing public inquiries, including air 

passenger screening complaints, received by the TCC and FSD staff.24

Overall, upon receiving a complaint, TSA headquarters units and local 

TSA airport staff may address the complaint directly or refer it to other 

offices for review and resolution after determining which one has the 

necessary expertise and knowledge to address the alleged incident. For 

example, according to TSA officials, if an air passenger submits the 

complaint through the TCC, TCC staff attempt to resolve it by providing a 

response to the air passenger using pertinent template language that 

explains TSA policy and screening procedures. Alternatively, the TCC 

may refer screening complaints for resolution to other TSA headquarters 

offices, depending on the specific allegation. For example, complaints 

alleging discrimination on the basis of a disability or medical condition are 

The directive indicates that inquiries received by the TCC will be 

answered by the TCC or will be forwarded to the appropriate FSD staff for 

response, and that inquiries received by FSD staff will be answered by 

FSD staff or will be forwarded to the TCC for response. In addition, the 

operations directive provides several time frames for responding to 

complaints. For example, TSA should respond within 48 hours for e-mail 

inquiries addressed by the TCC, and within 72 hours for telephone 

inquiries addressed by the TCC.

 

23See TSA Operations Directive: Processing Inquiries Received by the TSA Contact 

Center, TSA Claims Management Office, and Federal Security Director Staffs, OD-400-5-

1A, September 15, 2005.

24As defined in the operational directive, an inquiry is defined as any communication, letter 

mail, facsimile, electronic mail, or telephone call received by the TCC or by FSD staff that 

requires a response. To complement this operations directive, TSA staff at one of the six 

airports that we contacted during our review had additional written instructions for 

processing public inquiries, such as air passenger screening complaints.

Complaint Referral and 

Resolution
 

Page 12 GAO-13-43 Air Passenger Screening Complaints 

referred to the Disability Branch.25 Also, the TCC may forward complaints 

about customer service to the customer service representative at the 

airport identified in the complaint for investigation and resolution.26

Regardless of whether a complaint is initially received by a TSA 

headquarters unit or at the airport at which the incident took place, 

according to TSA officials, local TSA airport officials generally conduct 

most follow-up investigations since they are well placed to collect 

additional airport-specific information and interview local staff. However, 

specific actions taken to investigate and resolve complaints vary by 

airport. For example, customer service representatives may be involved 

in reviewing screening complaints, obtaining additional information from 

the air passengers to determine when and where the incident took place, 

and reviewing video footage of the incident to help identify additional 

details of the incident, such as the identity of the screener(s) who may 

have been involved in the incident and what had actually happened 

during the incident. If the situation warrants it, the customer service 

representative may forward the complaint as well as the video footage to 

the TSA screening supervisor or manager for additional review and 

action. The supervisor or manager may review the video footage and 

obtain a statement from the screener to determine what happened during 

the incident and the extent to which the screener may have been at 

fault—for example, whether the screener violated TSA standard operating 

Alternatively, if an air passenger submits a complaint directly to TSA staff 

at the airport, it is the responsibility of these staff members to investigate 

and resolve the complaint or, if necessary, refer it to TSA units at 

headquarters, such as the Disability Branch. For example, according to 

TSA officials, if an air passenger makes a complaint in person at the 

checkpoint, TSA supervisors and managers are to attempt to resolve the 

complaint at the checkpoint before the situation escalates.

 

25The Disability and Multicultural Branches work with DHS’s Office of Civil Rights & Civil 

Liberties in addressing some air passenger screening complaints. For example, the office 

generally refers screening complaints that it receives from air passengers to the branches 

for resolution, according to TSA officials. Also, the office may offer technical assistance to 

the branches when handling screening complaints. In the case of disability screening 

complaints, according to TSA officials, the Disability Branch provides weekly information 

on these complaints to this office, and air passengers can appeal the decisions of the 

Disability Branch to this office.

26For the purpose of this report, “investigation” refers to actions taken to gather 

information needed to resolve a complaint, and “complaint investigator” refers to the 

person responsible for gathering that information.
 

Page 13 GAO-13-43 Air Passenger Screening Complaints 

procedures, or behaved unprofessionally or inappropriately toward the air 

passenger.

Depending on the nature and severity of the allegation, TSA airport staff 

may also elevate the complaint and evidence to the airport’s Assistant 

Federal Security Director (AFSD) for Screening or to TSA headquarters 

units, such as the Disability Branch or the Office of Inspections, for formal 

investigation.27 If the investigation were to find fault with the screener, the 

screener’s supervisor or manager is to determine the corrective action to 

be taken.28 Corrective actions specified in TSA’s guidance range from 

mandating the screener to take additional training to correct the behavior 

to terminating the screener’s employment for multiple repeat offenses or 

single egregious actions, such as theft of air passenger property.29

Following the outcome of the investigation and any resulting corrective 

actions, the TSA headquarters unit or the FSD or his/her staff, such as a 

customer service representative, is to communicate the status of the 

resolution to the air passenger—such as by reiterating that TSA 

procedures were followed or by issuing an apology and informing the air 

passenger that corrective actions were taken.

 

27According to officials from the Office of Inspections, their office has not conducted formal 

investigations of air passenger screening complaints.

28We previously reported that complaint resolution processes in federal agencies should 

help ensure that the subjects of complaints receive appropriate training or disciplinary 

action, when necessary, in order to help prevent a problem from occurring again. GAO, 

Crime Victims’ Rights Act: Increasing Awareness, Modifying the Complaint Process, and 

Enhancing Compliance Monitoring Will Improve Implementation of the Act, GAO-09-54 

(Washington, D.C.: Dec. 15, 2008).

29TSA, Guidelines on Using the Table of Offenses and Penalties for Appropriate Discipline 

for Common Offenses, September 26, 2011. The Disability and Multicultural Branches can 

also recommend that screeners receive additional training, if appropriate.
 

Page 14 GAO-13-43 Air Passenger Screening Complaints 

TSA’s five centralized mechanisms for receiving air passenger screening 

complaints provide the agency with a significant amount of information it 

can use to monitor or enhance screening operations. However, TSA does 

not have agencywide policy, consistent processes, or an agency focal 

point to guide the receipt of these complaints or to use complaint 

information to inform management about the nature and extent of the 

screening complaints to help improve screening operations and customer 

service.

TSA receives and documents screening complaints that air passengers 

submit through four headquarters units—the TCC, the Executive 

Secretariat, the Multicultural Branch, and the Disability Branch—as well 

as the Talk to TSA web-based feedback mechanism, which e-mails the 

screening complaint information directly to designated TSA airport staff. 

As shown in figure 3, the number of complaints submitted through these 

mechanisms fluctuated somewhat from October 2009 through June 2012. 

The major exception was a very large increase in the number of 

complaints submitted to three mechanisms in November and December 

2010, which may be attributed to several factors, including a November

2010 public opt-out campaign reported by the media to protest the use of 

Advanced Imaging Technology and enhanced pat-down procedures for 

screening air passengers.

Lack of an 

Agencywide Policy, 

Consistent Processes, 

and Agency Focal 

Point Limits TSA’s 

Ability to Receive and 

Use Complaint 

Information

Five Mechanisms Receive 

Thousands of Air 

Passenger Complaints
 

Page 15 GAO-13-43 Air Passenger Screening Complaints 

Figure 3: Numbers of Monthly Air Passenger Screening Complaints That TSA Received from October 2009 through June 2012
 

Page 16 GAO-13-43 Air Passenger Screening Complaints 

Note: Complaint data from the Office of the Executive Secretariat include complaints about screening 

and other matters. Also, complaints that a TSA unit refers to another unit, such as complaints that the 

TCC refers to the Disability Branch, may be counted in each unit’s data. 

The volume of complaints that TSA received through each of its five main 

mechanisms varied from October 2009 through June 2012. Also, because 

these mechanisms use different categories for screening complaints and 

have different capabilities for data analysis, we were not able to combine 

the data from these mechanisms to discuss overall patterns and trends in 

volume or categories of complaints. A discussion of complaint information 

in each mechanism follows.

The TCC received the bulk of the air passenger screening complaints that 

the agency documented during this time period. Using TCC data, TSA 

has reported that it receives about 750,000 public inquiries annually 

through the TCC and that 8 percent of these inquiries involve air 

passenger complaints (including complaints about screening). As noted 

below, however, this information does not include complaint data from 

other TSA complaint mechanisms. Specifically, the TCC received a total 

of 39,616 screening complaints that air passengers submitted by e-mail 

and telephone from October 2009 through June 2012. The TCC divides 

screening complaints into seven main categories, five having multiple 

subcategories. Figure 4 shows the total numbers of screening complaints 

by the seven main TCC categories, such as 17,153 complaints about patdown procedures.
 

Page 17 GAO-13-43 Air Passenger Screening Complaints 

Figure 4: Total Numbers of Air Passenger Screening Complaints That the TCC 

Received from October 2009 through June 2012, by Category

Note: Five of the seven main categories in the TCC database contain multiple subcategories. 

Figure 5 depicts the numbers of screening complaints that the TCC 

received from October 2009 through June 2012 by the four main TCC 

categories having the most complaints. As shown in figure 5, the numbers 

of screening complaints in these four categories remained relatively 

stable over this period. The major exception was a very large increase in 

the number of complaints about pat-down procedures in November and 

December 2010 and continuing periods of a relatively higher level of patdown complaints through September 2011. As mentioned before, this 

increase in complaints may be attributed to several factors, including the 

November 2010 public opt-out campaign reported by the media to protest 

the use of Advanced Imaging Technology and enhanced pat-down 

procedures for screening air passengers.
 

Page 18 GAO-13-43 Air Passenger Screening Complaints 

Figure 5: Numbers of Air Passenger Screening Complaints That the TCC Received from October 2009 through June 2012, by 

Category (Four Largest Categories)

The Office of the Executive Secretariat received 4,011 complaints that air 

passengers submitted by mail.30 For instance, these complaints include 

screening complaints related to, among other issues, Advanced Imaging 

Technology and enhanced pat-down procedures.31

 

30According to officials in this office, the Executive Secretariat database does not have the 

capability to differentiate between screening and nonscreening-related complaints based 

on the information it has on complaint subject categories.

31Although this database and the TCC database have certain categories with similar or 

identical names, other categories are specific to each database. For example, the 

Executive Secretariat database includes a category for inappropriate screening, while this 

type of complaint could be categorized in the TCC database as inconsistent screening or 

as screening process, among other categories.
 

Page 19 GAO-13-43 Air Passenger Screening Complaints 

The Multicultural Branch received 2,899 written screening complaints 

alleging violations of civil rights and civil liberties, 469 of which it 

processed as cases.32

Figure 6: Numbers of Air Passenger Screening Complaints That the Multicultural 

Branch Processed as Cases from October 2009 through June 2012, by Category

Figure 6 shows the number of cases, by 11 

categories, that the branch processed, such as 141 cases related to 

allegations of discrimination based on race or ethnicity.

Note: The TCC database has a category for civil rights complaints, but its subcategories are not 

directly comparable with the Multicultural Branch categories. For example, TCC includes 

subcategories for harassment, perceived discrimination, and perceived racial profiling, among others. 

 

32According to TSA officials, the branch refers screening complaints that it does not 

process as cases to other TSA units. The Multicultural Branch does not record categories 

for the complaints that it does not process as cases, so we did not include them in figure 

6.
 

Page 20 GAO-13-43 Air Passenger Screening Complaints 

The Disability Branch received 920 written screening complaints alleging 

discrimination on the basis of disability and medical condition. From 

these, the branch processed 1,233 cases.33 Figure 7 shows the number 

of cases, by 27 categories, that the branch processed, such as 201 cases 

related to inappropriate screening.

 

33If the screening complaint submitted by an air passenger includes complaints that fall 

under different categories of disabilities, the branch would process each one of them as a 

separate case. Thus, there are more cases processed than complaints received by the 

Disability Branch from October 2009 through June 2012.
 

Page 21 GAO-13-43 Air Passenger Screening Complaints 

Figure 7: Numbers of Air Passenger Screening Complaints That the Disability Branch Processed as Cases from October 2009 

through June 2012, by Category

Note: The TCC database has a category for disability complaints, but its subcategories for these 

complaints are not directly comparable with the Disability Branch categories. For example, the TCC 

database includes a subcategory for diabetes, while the Disability Branch has a category for insulin 

pumps. Also, more than half of the screening cases in the “Other” category are from fiscal year 2010 

because for that year the database did not have enough categories defined, according to TSA 

officials. The Disability Branch added additional categories to the database for fiscal year 2012 to 

avoid overusing the “Other” category. 

The Talk to TSA web-based mechanism received 4,506 air passenger 

screening complaints from April 2011 through June 2012. When 

submitting complaints through this mechanism, air passengers can select 

up to five complaint categories from a list of 20 possible categories. 

Figure 8 shows the number of screening complaints by 20 categories that 
 

Page 22 GAO-13-43 Air Passenger Screening Complaints 

the branch received, such as 1,512 complaints about the professionalism 

of TSA staff during the screening process.34

Figure 8: Numbers of Air Passenger Screening Complaints That Talk to TSA Received from April 2011 through June 2012, by 

Category

Note: When submitting complaints through this mechanism, air passengers can select up to five 

complaint categories from a list of 20 possible categories. If a passenger selects more than one 

category, each category is counted as a separate complaint when the complaints are reported by 

category. Thus, there are more than 4,506 complaints included in this figure. The TCC database has 

some categories and subcategories that are similar to the Talk to TSA categories, but others are 

unique to each database. For example, TCC does not have categories or subcategories 

corresponding to the Talk to TSA categories of carry-on property out of view, permitted/prohibited 

items, expert traveler and family lanes, or liquids, among others. 

 

34If a passenger selects more than one category, each category is counted as a separate 

complaint when the complaints are reported by category. Thus, there are more than 4,506 

complaints included in figure 8.
 

Page 23 GAO-13-43 Air Passenger Screening Complaints 

TSA has established five centralized mechanisms for receiving air 

passenger complaints, but it has not established an agencywide policy, 

consistent processes, or a focal point to guide receipt and use of this 

information to inform management about the nature and extent of the 

screening complaints to help improve screening operations and customer 

service.

With regard to agencywide policy, TSA has not established a policy to 

guide airports’ efforts to receive air passenger complaints. In the absence 

of such a policy, TSA officials at airports have wide discretion in how they 

implement TSA’s air passenger complaint process, including how they 

receive and document the complaints. For example, at the six airports 

that we contacted, the use of customer comment cards, which the U.S. 

General Services Administration (GSA) considers a relatively inexpensive 

means for government agencies to receive customer feedback, varied by 

airport.35

In addition, when TSA receives a customer comment card, either through 

air passengers mailing the cards, giving them to TSA screening 

supervisors or managers, or depositing the cards in a box at the security 

checkpoint, the card is to go to a customer service representative at the 

airport. However, TSA does not have a policy requiring that customer 

service representatives track these comment card submissions or report 

them to one of TSA’s five centralized mechanisms for receiving 

Specifically, customer comment cards were not used at two of 

the six airports we contacted, according to TSA officials at those airports, 

while at the other four airports customer comment cards were used to 

obtain air passenger input in varying ways. At two of these four airports, 

customer comment cards were on display at counters in the security 

checkpoints. At the other two airports, neither customer comment cards 

nor information about the cards was on display, but the cards were 

available to air passengers upon request, according to TSA airport 

officials. Passengers who are concerned about being late for their flight or 

about appearing uncooperative may be reluctant to ask for such cards, 

however.

 

35TSA officials at the airports can use a TSA customer comment card to obtain feedback 

from air passengers. The contractor at the SPP airport we contacted uses its own 

customer comment card to obtain this feedback. See the website of GSA’s Office of 

Citizen Services and Innovative Technologies for guidance on government use of 

customer comment cards at 

http://www.howto.gov/customer-service/collecting-feedback/comment-cards-factsheet#cost. 

No Agencywide Policy, 

Consistent Processes, or 

Focal Point for Guiding 

Receipt and Use of Air 

Passenger Screening 

Complaint Information 

Exists
 

Page 24 GAO-13-43 Air Passenger Screening Complaints 

complaints if the card includes a complaint. As a result, TSA does not 

know the full nature and extent of the complaints that air passengers 

make through customer comment cards. Also, TSA officials reported that 

the agency does not require TSA airport staff to collect and document 

information on the screening complaints that air passengers submit in 

person at the airport level because the agency has given these officials 

broad discretion in addressing these screening complaints.36

Further, TSA does not have a process to use all the information it 

currently collects in its efforts to inform the public of the nature and extent 

of air passenger screening complaints, monitor air passenger satisfaction 

with screening operations, and identify patterns and trends in screening 

complaints to help improve screening operations and customer service. 

For example, TSA has five centralized mechanisms through which it 

receives air passenger complaints, but the agency does not combine 

information from all of these sources to analyze the full nature and extent 

of air passenger screening complaints. TSA officials have noted that the 

agency receives about 750,000 contacts per year from the public by email and telephone through the TCC, and that about 8 percent of these 

contacts are related to complaints. However, this information does not 

include data on complaints received through other headquarters units or 

the Talk to TSA web-based form. We recognize that differences in 

complaint categories among the various databases could hinder any 

efforts by TSA to combine the complaint data, which we discuss further 

below.

However, 

without an agencywide policy to guide the receipt and tracking of 

screening complaints at the airport level, TSA does not have reasonable 

assurance that headquarters and airport entities involved in the 

processes of receiving, tracking, and reporting these complaints are 

conducting these activities consistently.

TSA informs the public of the nature and extent of air passenger 

screening complaints through the U.S. Department of Transportation’s 

monthly Air Travel Consumer Report, but the number TSA reports in this 

publication only includes complaints received through the TCC and does 

not include the complaints TSA received through its other four 

 

36TSA staff at the airports we contacted told us that if air passengers make screening 

complaints that have the potential to attract the attention of the media, TSA screening 

supervisors or managers or customer service representatives would generally collect 

some information about the complaints in case they have to answer questions about them.
 

Page 25 GAO-13-43 Air Passenger Screening Complaints 

mechanisms. The July 2012 report, for example, noted that TSA had 

received about 900 air passenger screening complaints in May 2012, with 

screening complaints about courtesy and personal property constituting 

the bulk of the complaints and screening complaints about processing 

time and screening procedures constituting the rest of the complaints.37

In addition, as discussed earlier, because TSA does not have a 

consistent process for categorizing air passenger complaints data, 

including standardized categories of complaints, it is unable to compile 

and analyze all of the data to identify patterns and trends. Specifically, 

each of the five centralized mechanisms has different screening 

complaint categories and different capabilities to analyze the data. As a 

result, TSA cannot compile information from all five mechanisms to 

identify patterns and trends in air passenger complaints and monitor its 

efforts to resolve complaints on a systemic basis. For example, while the 

TCC database and the Talk to TSA database each may have categories 

with identical or similar names, such as Advanced Imaging Technology 

Further, TSA is using only the complaints received through the TCC to 

calculate an air passenger satisfaction indicator in its Office of Security 

Operations’ Executive Scorecard. According to TSA, the purpose of this 

scorecard is for FSD management and staff to monitor operational 

effectiveness of airport security checkpoints and make changes as 

needed, such as to improve screening operations and customer service. 

TSA officials further stated that the agency has primarily been using the 

TCC because the TCC information on air passenger screening 

complaints is readily available. According to the Assistant Administrator of 

TSA’s Office of Civil Rights & Liberties, Ombudsman and Traveler 

Engagement, partly as a result of our review, the agency began 

channeling information from the Talk to TSA database to the TCC in early 

October 2012. However, it is unclear whether the agency 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. It is also unclear whether these efforts will 

include data on screening complaints submitted locally through customer 

comment cards or in person at airport security checkpoints.

 

37U.S. Department of Transportation, Office of Aviation Enforcement and Proceedings, 

Aviation Consumer Protection Division, Air Travel Consumer Report, July 2012. The 

report does not define these categories of screening complaints or the extent to which 

these categories include information on all the categories of screening complaints in the 

TCC database.
 

Page 26 GAO-13-43 Air Passenger Screening Complaints 

and pat-downs, other categories are unique to certain databases. For 

instance, the TCC database does not have categories or subcategories 

corresponding to the Talk to TSA categories of carry-on property out of 

view, permitted/prohibited items, expert traveler and family lanes, or 

liquids, among others. As a result, TSA cannot combine the data from 

different databases to identify whether particular aspects of the screening 

experience may warrant additional attention or whether TSA’s efforts to 

improve customer service are having any effect on the number of 

complaints.

Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government calls for 

agencies to develop control activities, such as policies, procedures, 

techniques, and mechanisms that enforce management’s directives.38

Further, TSA has not designated a focal point for coordinating 

agencywide policy and processes related to receiving, tracking, 

documenting, reporting, and acting on screening complaints. Standards 

for Internal Control in the Federal Government calls for an agency’s 

organizational structure to clearly define key areas of authority and 

responsibility and establish appropriate lines of reporting.

 A 

consistent policy to guide local TSA officials’ efforts to receive, track, and 

report complaints would help provide TSA reasonable assurance that 

these activities are being conducted in a consistent manner throughout 

commercial airports and provide the agency with improved ability to 

oversee these local efforts. Moreover, a process to systematically collect 

information on air passenger complaints from all mechanisms, including 

standardization of the categories of air passenger complaints to provide a 

basis for comparison, would give TSA a more comprehensive picture of 

the volume, nature, and extent of air passenger screening complaints and 

better enable the agency to improve screening operations and customer 

service.

39

 

38

 An 

agencywide policy and process would help standardize how TSA receives 

complaints and how TSA analyzes and uses the information it collects, 

but without a focal point at TSA headquarters, the agency does not have 

a centralized entity to guide and coordinate these efforts, or to suggest 

any additional refinements to the system. We discuss issues related to a 

focal point in more detail later in this report. TSA headquarters officials we 

GAO/AIMD-00-21.3.1. 

39GAO/AIMD-00-21.3.1. 
 

Page 27 GAO-13-43 Air Passenger Screening Complaints 

interviewed stated that the five mechanisms were designed at different 

times and for different purposes, and they agreed that the agency could 

benefit from a consistent complaints policy, a process to collect 

information from all mechanisms, and a focal point to coordinate these 

efforts.

TSA has several methods to inform air passengers about its processes 

for making screening complaints; however, as with receipt and use of 

screening complaint data, it does not have an agencywide policy, 

guidance, and a focal point to guide these efforts, or mechanisms to 

share information on guidance and best practices among TSA airport staff 

to ensure consistency in making air passengers aware of TSA processes 

for submitting complaints about the screening process.

At the headquarters level, TSA’s primary method for providing information 

to air passengers about TSA screening policies and processes is through 

the agency’s website. During fiscal year 2012, TSA made improvements 

to its website to make it easier for air passengers to find information about 

how to provide feedback to TSA, including compliments and complaints, 

according to TSA officials. For example, the home page of TSA’s website 

currently displays an icon that allows air passengers to ask questions or 

submit feedback directly to TSA staff via an electronic form. The home 

page also displays an icon that provides information for air passengers to 

contact the TCC, which receives the majority of documented airpassenger-screening-related complaints, and other TSA units involved in 

addressing screening complaints. At the airport level, TSA has developed 

several methods that local TSA staff can use to provide information at the 

checkpoints for air passengers to submit feedback to TSA, such as 

displaying signs and stickers and providing customer comment cards that 

contain information for contacting TSA and that allow air passengers to 

submit compliments and complaints.

Figure 9 shows examples of TSA’s methods for informing air passengers 

on how to submit feedback to the agency.

TSA Has Several 

Methods to Inform Air 

Passengers about 

Making Screening 

Complaints, but Does 

Not Consistently 

Implement Them

Methods at Headquarters 

and Airports
 

Page 28 GAO-13-43 Air Passenger Screening Complaints 

Figure 9: Examples of TSA Efforts to Inform Air Passengers about Procedures for Making Screening Complaints

Note: (A) Home page of TSA website displaying links to the electronic feedback form and contact 

center, (B) TSA’s electronic feedback form, (C) sign placed at airport checkpoint advertising how to 

provide feedback to TSA, (D) stickers placed at airport checkpoints advertising TSA’s electronic 

feedback form, (E) customer comment card drop box provided near airport checkpoint. 

TSA has developed standard signs, stickers, and customer comment 

cards that can be used at airport checkpoints to inform air passengers 

about how to submit feedback to the agency; however, in the absence of 

agencywide policy and guidance to inform air passengers, FSDs have 

discretion in how and whether to use these methods. As a result, there 

was inconsistent implementation of these methods at the six airports we 

contacted. For example, at one airport we visited, all four checkpoints had 

Inconsistent 

Implementation at Airports
 

Page 29 GAO-13-43 Air Passenger Screening Complaints 

visible signs and stickers advertising TSA’s contact information, while at 

another airport, we did not observe any signs or visible materials at the 

checkpoints advertising how to contact TSA, and at a third airport, we 

observed signs that were partially obscured from air passengers’ view. 

Specifically, at one checkpoint at that third airport, we observed a sign 

with a quick response code for providing feedback to TSA about 

passengers’ screening experience.40

TSA airport officials we interviewed at three of the six airports we 

contacted stated that the agency could take additional actions to enhance 

air passenger awareness of TSA’s complaint processes, such as posting 

information on shuttle buses or providing fact sheets or brochures to air 

passengers earlier in the screening process or during airport check-in. 

For example, an official at one airport suggested that TSA display audio 

or video materials describing TSA’s complaint process, rather than 

posting more signs. Also, as we previously discussed, TSA’s screening 

complaint processes entail taking corrective actions to improve screening 

systems, procedures, and staff. However, if air passengers wish to submit 

screening complaints but are not aware of the processes for doing so, air 

passengers may be less likely to submit complaints to the agency, thus 

potentially limiting the agency’s efforts to identify systemic issues and 

take corrective actions or make any needed improvements to the 

screening process.

However, this sign was placed in a 

corner away from direct air passenger traffic. Also, as previously 

discussed, at two of six airports we contacted, customer comment cards 

were displayed at the checkpoint, while at two other airports customer 

comment cards were provided only to air passengers who specifically ask 

for the cards or TSA contact information or who request to speak with a 

screening supervisor or manager, according to TSA airport officials. As 

mentioned earlier, passengers who are concerned about being late for 

their flight or about appearing uncooperative may be reluctant to ask for 

such cards, however. At the remaining two airports, customer comment 

cards were not used, according to TSA officials at those airports. 

Representatives from four of the eight aviation industry groups that we 

interviewed also stated that the type and amount of information provided 

to air passengers about feedback mechanisms, such as how to submit 

complaints, vary among airports.

 

40Upon scanning the code using a smartphone, the air passenger can use the Talk to TSA 

electronic feedback form on TSA’s website.
 

Page 30 GAO-13-43 Air Passenger Screening Complaints 

The Conference Report accompanying the Consolidated Appropriations 

Act, 2012, directed TSA to make every effort to ensure members of the 

traveling public are aware of the procedures and process for making 

complaints about passenger screening.41 Moreover, Standards for 

Internal Control in the Federal Government states that in order to ensure 

effective communication to achieve agency goals, management should 

ensure there are adequate means of communicating with, and obtaining 

information from, external stakeholders that may have a significant impact 

on the agency’s achieving its goals.42

 

41H.R. Rep. No. 112-331, at 975 (2011).

The standards also call for 

agencies to develop control activities, such as policies, procedures, 

techniques, and mechanisms that enforce management’s directives. TSA 

has methods and made efforts to inform air passengers about complaint 

processes, but opportunities exist to increase air passenger awareness, 

such as through greater use of the TSA website and brochures or other 

materials displayed or provided at airport checkpoints, as well as through 

more consistent implementation of these efforts at airports. TSA officials 

at four of the six airports we contacted also said that the agency could do 

more to share best practices among customer service representatives for 

addressing passenger complaints, including for informing air passengers 

about complaint processes. For example, TSA holds periodic conference 

calls for Customer Support Managers to discuss customer service. 

However, Customer Support Managers have not used this mechanism to 

discuss best practices for informing air passengers about processes for 

submitting complaints, according to the officials we interviewed. Also, 

TSA has not sponsored other information-sharing mechanisms, such as 

training or conferences, for Customer Support Managers to learn about 

best practices for informing air passengers, among other things. TSA 

officials also recognize that passengers may intentionally choose not to 

submit their complaints to TSA at the airport checkpoint because of the 

perception that raising a complaint could result in being unfairly subjected 

to additional screening or being treated rudely by screening officials. In 

addition, TSA does not have a focal point to coordinate agencywide policy 

for informing air passengers about complaint processes, or to suggest 

additional refinements to the overall process for increasing air passenger 

awareness of the complaints mechanisms. 

42GAO/AIMD-00-21.3.1. 
 

Page 31 GAO-13-43 Air Passenger Screening Complaints 

Accordingly, greater awareness of TSA complaint processes could help 

alleviate passengers’ potential reluctance to submit complaints at the 

checkpoint. An agencywide policy to inform the public about the 

processes for making complaints, a focal point for developing this policy 

and guiding TSA’s efforts to implement it, and mechanisms for sharing 

best practices among local TSA officials could help provide TSA 

reasonable assurance that these activities are being conducted in a 

consistent manner across commercial airports and help local TSA officials 

better inform the public by learning from one another about what practices 

work well.

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

independence established to help ensure that these types of processes 

are fair, impartial, and credible. Specifically, at the airport level, TSA 

officials who are responsible for resolving air passenger complaints 

(referred to in this report as complaint investigators) are not independent 

of the TSA airport staff who are the subjects of the complaints. Instead, 

complaint investigators are generally located in the same airport and 

report to the same chain of command as the individuals who are cited in 

the complaints. As previously discussed, TSA receives the bulk of the 

documented screening complaints via the TCC, and, if necessary, these 

complaints are ultimately investigated and resolved at the local airport 

level. Under TSA’s process, complaints may be referred to other TSA 

offices, such as TSA’s Disability and Multicultural Branches. These TSA 

branches address complaints from all air passengers with disabilities or 

medical conditions or from air passengers alleging violations of other civil 

rights or civil liberties. However, all screener-related complaints are 

investigated at the airport level, even for complaints that are initially 

referred to the Disability or Multicultural Branch.

The American Bar Association Revised Standards for the Establishment 

and Operation of Ombuds Offices, which can be used to guide federal 

complaint processes, states that a key indicator of independence is 

whether anyone subject to the ombudsman’s jurisdiction can control or 

limit the ombudsman’s performance of assigned duties.43

 

43American Bar Association, Revised Standards for the Establishment and Operation of 

Ombuds Offices (February 2004). The American Bar Association developed these 

standards to provide advice and guidance on the structure and operation of ombuds 

offices so that ombuds may better fulfill their functions and so that individuals who avail 

themselves of their aid may do so with greater confidence in the integrity of the process.

Further, the 

TSA’s Complaint 

Resolution Processes 

Lack Independence, 

but TSA Is Taking 

Steps to Increase 

Independence
 

Page 32 GAO-13-43 Air Passenger Screening Complaints 

ombudsman is to conduct inquiries and investigations in an impartial 

manner, free from initial bias and conflicts of interest. Similarly, the U.S. 

Ombudsman Association advocates that to maintain independence, the 

ombudsman should have the discretion to prescribe how complaints are 

to be made, received, and acted upon, including the scope and manner of 

investigations.44 Moreover, to ensure impartiality, the ombudsman should 

absent himself or herself from involvement in complaints where a conflict 

of interest or the appearance of conflict of interest may exist. These 

standards maintain that independence and impartiality are important 

when addressing complaints because they establish confidence that the 

process is fair and credible. While TSA is not required to comply with 

ombudsman standards, these voluntary standards can serve as a useful 

guideline for implementing the core principles of an effective complainthandling process. In addition, Standards for Internal Control in the 

Federal Government states that key duties and responsibilities need to be 

divided or segregated among different people.45

At all six airports that we contacted, TSA Customer Support Managers 

stated that they receive air passenger complaints, review video footage of 

the incident, and communicate with complainants about the status and 

resolution of their complaints. Customer Support Managers also stated 

that they do not conduct formal investigations to determine the cause of a 

complaint or whether the screener involved in the complaint was at fault 

or the air passenger was misinformed. Rather, at the five airports that we 

contacted at which TSA has direct responsibility for screening operations, 

the Customer Support Managers collect information about the facts and 

circumstances related to the complaint and forward this information to the 

screener’s supervisory chain.46

 

44United States Ombudsman Association, Governmental Ombudsman Standards, 

(Dayton, OH: October 2003).

At these five airports, the TSA screener 

supervisor or manager is responsible for obtaining the screener’s 

statement and determining fault as well as any corrective actions that 

may be taken against the screener. However, TSA Customer Support 

45GAO/AIMD-00-21.3.1. 

46At the SPP airport that we contacted, the TSA Customer Support Manager is 

responsible for addressing screening complaints related to policy and standard operating 

procedures. The contractor is responsible for collecting information about the facts and 

circumstances related to complaints about a passenger’s screening experience as well as 

resolving these complaints or, if necessary, referring them to TSA for resolution.
 

Page 33 GAO-13-43 Air Passenger Screening Complaints 

Managers as well as all TSA screening personnel, including TSA 

screening supervisors and managers, report to FSDs, and are therefore 

in the same chain of command as the subjects of air passenger 

complaints. Because FSDs may be concerned about complaints reflecting 

negatively on their management of TSA screening operations, this raises 

questions about independence and the appearance of impartiality and 

their ability to conduct credible, unbiased investigations. Figure 10 depicts 

a simplified example of the typical reporting structure at airports at which 

TSA has direct responsibility for screening operations.
 

Page 34 GAO-13-43 Air Passenger Screening Complaints 

Figure 10: Simplified Organizational Chart Depicting TSA Chain of Command at a 

Typical Category X Airport

Note: According to TSA officials, the Customer Support Managers and Stakeholder Relations 

Managers can report directly to the FSD, to the Deputy FSD, to the AFSD for Screening, to the AFSD 

for Operations, or to the AFSD for Mission Support depending on the airport. TSA classifies 

commercial airports into one of five categories (X, I, II, III, and IV) based on various factors, such as 

the total number of takeoffs and landings annually, the extent to which passengers are screened at 

the airport, and other special security considerations. In general, category X airports have the largest 

number of passenger boardings, and category IV airports have the smallest. 
 

Page 35 GAO-13-43 Air Passenger Screening Complaints 

TSA officials stated that the desire to resolve complaints locally led to 

TSA’s decision to allow complaint investigators to be located in the same 

airport with those whom they are investigating. Also, TSA officials noted 

that resource constraints may limit the agency’s ability to send TSA 

officials from headquarters offices to conduct independent investigations 

of complaints at each airport. However, the lack of independence of the 

complaint investigators creates the potential for a conflict of interest to 

arise between the investigator and the individual under investigation. For 

this reason, in accordance with ombudsman standards, it is important for 

the structure of the complaint process to ensure the independence of 

complaint investigators in order to maintain impartial investigations, as 

well as to maintain the appearance of impartiality during investigations, 

not only to ensure that they are being fair, but also to uphold the 

credibility of the complaint process. Having a more independent complaint 

resolution process would better position TSA to make informed and 

unbiased decisions about complaints and ensure that corrective actions 

are taken, as needed, against screeners who are reported to have 

exhibited unprofessional or inappropriate behavior with air passengers.

While TSA has an Ombudsman Division that could help ensure greater 

independence in the complaint processes, it 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 that 

division. However, recognizing the importance of independence in the 

complaint processes, TSA is developing a new process for referring air 

passenger complaints directly to this office from airports and for providing 

air passengers an independent avenue to make complaints about airport 

checkpoint screening. In August 2012, during the course of our review, 

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. The Assistant Administrator of TSA’s Office of Civil Rights 

& Liberties, Ombudsman and Traveler Engagement stated that she

expected the Ombudsman Division to begin addressing a greater number 

of air passenger complaints as a result. According to the Assistant 

Administrator, the division will not handle complaints for which there 

exists an established process that includes an appeal function, such as 

disability complaints or other civil rights or civil liberties complaints, in 

order to avoid duplication of currently established processes. Since the 

external function of the Ombudsman Division has not yet been fully 

implemented, it is too early to assess the extent to which this new 

function of the complaints resolution process will conform to professional 
 

Page 36 GAO-13-43 Air Passenger Screening Complaints 

standards for organizational independence, and help mitigate possible 

concerns about impartiality and objectivity.

TSA is also in the process of developing a Passenger Advocate Program, 

which the agency plans to begin implementing by January 2013, 

according to the Assistant Administrator of TSA’s Office of Civil Rights & 

Liberties, Ombudsman and Traveler Engagement. This program will entail 

training selected TSA airport staff to take on a collateral passenger 

advocate role, according to that official. Passenger advocates will 

respond in real time to identify and resolve traveler-related screening 

complaints quickly, consistent with TSA policies and screening 

procedures, according to the Assistant Administrator. Advocates will also 

respond to air passenger requests, assist air passengers with medical 

conditions or disabilities, and be prepared to assist air passengers who 

provide advance notification to TSA via the national TSA Cares helpline. 

According to the Assistant Administrator, the Passenger Advocate 

Program will work in conjunction with the new external complaint function 

of the Ombudsman Division and provide air passenger advocates with the 

option to refer air passengers directly to the Ombudsman Division. 

Because passenger advocates are to serve under the FSD chain of 

command, this arrangement also raises questions about whether there is 

a lack of independence between passenger advocates and the subjects 

of air passenger complaints. The Assistant Administrator explained that 

any perception of lack of independence would be addressed by training 

passenger advocates to explain to air passengers that they may submit 

complaints directly to the Ombudsman, who is outside of the airport chain 

of command. Because this program has not yet been approved by the 

TSA Administrator or implemented, it is too early to assess the extent to 

which passenger advocates will help mitigate possible concerns about 

impartiality and objectivity in the complaint processes. 

According to available data, TSA receives a relatively small number of 

complaints considering the millions of air passengers the agency screens 

each month. However, the agency’s ability to understand the full nature 

and extent of those complaints is limited because TSA does not 

systematically collect some of the screening complaint data at the airport 

level, uses only some of the data it has available to it in its reports and 

analysis, and collects the data in a manner that makes it difficult for the 

agency to aggregate and analyze the data for trends. Further, the 

inconsistent nature of implementation of the screening complaint

processes at commercial airports limits TSA’s ability to oversee these 

efforts. Thus, a policy to consistently guide agencywide efforts to receive, 

Conclusions
 

Page 37 GAO-13-43 Air Passenger Screening Complaints 

track, and report air passenger screening complaints would help provide 

TSA reasonable assurance that TSA headquarters and airport entities are 

conducting these activities consistently. Moreover, a consistent process 

to systematically analyze information on air passenger screening 

complaints from all mechanisms for receiving complaints, including 

standardized screening complaint categories and capabilities for data 

analysis, would give TSA a more comprehensive picture of the volume, 

nature, and extent of air passenger screening complaints and better 

enable the agency to improve screening operations and customer 

service. In addition, designating a focal point for developing and 

coordinating agencywide policy on air passenger screening complaint 

processes, guiding the analysis and use of the agency’s screening 

complaint data, and informing the public about the nature and extent of 

screening complaints would help ensure that these efforts are 

implemented consistently throughout the agency. Finally, TSA has a 

number of methods to inform the public about its processes for submitting 

screening complaints, but does not have an agencywide policy to guide 

these efforts or mechanisms for sharing best practices for informing air 

passengers about screening complaint processes, which could help TSA 

staff—particularly at the airport level—better inform the public by learning 

from one another about what is working well.

To improve TSA’s oversight of air passenger screening complaint 

processes, we recommend that the Administrator of TSA take the 

following four actions, consistent with standards for internal control, to

• 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;

• 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; and

• establish agencywide policy to guide TSA’s 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.

Recommendations for 

Executive Action
 

Page 38 GAO-13-43 Air Passenger Screening Complaints 

We provided a draft of this report to the Department of Homeland Security

(DHS) for comment. DHS, in written comments received October 16, 

2012, concurred with the recommendations and identified actions taken, 

under way, or planned to implement the recommendations. Written 

comments are summarized below, and official DHS comments are 

reproduced in appendix I. In addition, DHS provided written technical 

comments, which we incorporated, as appropriate.

In response to our recommendation that TSA establish a consistent policy 

to guide agencywide efforts for receiving, tracking, and reporting air 

passenger screening complaints, DHS concurred with the 

recommendation and 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 efforts of headquarters and field 

locations in receiving, tracking, and reporting air passenger screening 

complaints. We believe that these are beneficial steps that would address 

our 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.

In response to our recommendation that TSA establish a process to 

systematically compile and analyze information on air passenger 

screening complaints from all complaint mechanisms, DHS concurred 

with the recommendation and stated that TSA, through the TCC, is taking 

steps to increase its analysis of passenger complaint information and will 

build on this effort to further compile and analyze information on air 

passenger screening complaints. However, DHS did not provide 

additional details on the steps TSA is taking, so we cannot comment on 

the extent to which these steps will fully address our recommendation. In 

its technical comments, TSA stated that the agency began channeling 

information from the Talk to TSA database to the TCC on October 3, 

2012, and we updated our report accordingly. However, it is still unclear 

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. It is also unclear how TSA will address the difficulties we 

identified in collecting standardized screening data across different 

complaint categories and mechanisms. As highlighted in our report, 

establishing a consistent process to systematically compile and analyze 

Agency Comments 

and Our Evaluation
 

Page 39 GAO-13-43 Air Passenger Screening Complaints 

information on air passenger screening complaints will help provide TSA 

with a more comprehensive picture of the volume, nature, and extent of 

air passenger screening complaints and better enable the agency to 

improve screening operations and customer service for the traveling 

public.

In response to our recommendation that TSA designate a focal point for 

the complaints identification, analysis, and public outreach process, DHS 

concurred with the recommendation and stated that the Assistant 

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

Traveler Engagement is the focal point for overseeing the key TSA 

entities involved with processing passenger screening complaints. We are 

encouraged that the agency has identified a focal point for these efforts 

but note that the Assistant Administrator only oversees the TSA’s 

complaint-related processes in the Office of Civil Rights & Liberties, 

Ombudsman and Traveler Engagement. Thus, it will be important for the 

Assistant Administrator to coordinate with other TSA offices when acting 

as the TSA focal point to address the weaknesses we identified in our 

report. For example, as mentioned in DHS’s comment letter, it will be 

important for the Assistant Administrator to work closely with 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. The Assistant Administrator for the Office of Civil Rights & 

Liberties, Ombudsman and Traveler Engagement will also need to 

coordinate with the Office of the Executive Secretariat, which is not 

mentioned in DHS’s comment letter, given the thousands of air passenger 

complaints that this office receives, as well as with other DHS and TSA 

offices that have a role in the air passenger complaint processes—

including, but not limited to, the TSA Office of Inspections, TSA Office of 

Legislative Affairs, and the DHS Office of the Inspector General.

In response to our recommendation that TSA establish agencywide policy 

to guide TSA’s 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. DHS stated that TSA would develop a policy to better 

inform air passengers about the screening complaint processes, to 

include mechanisms for identifying and sharing best practices for 

implementing these processes at the airport level. We will continue to 

monitor TSA’s progress in implementing this recommendation.
 

Page 40 GAO-13-43 Air Passenger Screening Complaints 

We are sending copies of this report to the Secretary of Homeland 

Security, the TSA Administrator, appropriate congressional committees, 

and other interested parties. In addition, the report is available at no 

charge on the GAO website at http://www.gao.gov. 

If you or your staff have any questions concerning this report, please 

contact me at (202) 512-4379 or at lords@gao.gov. Contact points for our 

Offices of Congressional Relations and Public Affairs may be found on 

that last page of this report. GAO staff who made major contributions to 

this report are listed in appendix II.

Stephen M. Lord

Director

Homeland Security and Justice Issues
 

Page 41 GAO-13-43 Air Passenger Screening Complaints 

List of Committees

The Honorable Mary Landrieu

Chairman

The Honorable Dan Coats

Ranking Member

Subcommittee on Homeland Security

Committee on Appropriations

United States Senate

The Honorable Robert B. Aderholt

Chairman

The Honorable David E. Price

Ranking Member

Subcommittee on Homeland Security

Committee on Appropriations

House of Representatives
Appendix I: Comments from the Department of 

Homeland Security 

Page 42 GAO-13-43 Air Passenger Screening Complaints 

Appendix I: Comments from the Department 

of Homeland Security
Appendix I: Comments from the Department of 

Homeland Security 

Page 43 GAO-13-43 Air Passenger Screening Complaints 
Appendix I: Comments from the Department of 

Homeland Security 

Page 44 GAO-13-43 Air Passenger Screening Complaints 
Appendix II: GAO Contact and Staff 

Acknowledgments

Page 45 GAO-13-43 Air Passenger Screening Complaints 

Stephen M. Lord, (202) 512-4379 or lords@gao.gov

In addition to the contact named above, Jessica Lucas-Judy (Assistant 

Director), Carissa Bryant, and Juan Tapia-Videla made significant 

contributions to the work. Also contributing to this report were David 

Alexander, Lydia Araya, Tom Lombardi, Lara Miklozek, and Linda Miller.

Appendix II: GAO Contact and Staff 

Acknowledgments 

GAO Contact

Staff 

Acknowledgments

(441056)
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.