U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE

32–637 PDF WASHINGTON : 2018

ASSESSING THE TSA CHECKPOINT: THE PRECHECK 

PROGRAM AND AIRPORT WAIT TIMES 

HEARING 

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON 

TRANSPORTATION AND 

PROTECTIVE SECURITY 

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

ONE HUNDRED FIFTEENTH CONGRESS 

SECOND SESSION 

MAY 17, 2018 

Serial No. 115–64 

Printed for the use of the Committee on Homeland Security 

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


Congress.#13
(II) 

COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY 

MICHAEL T. MCCAUL, Texas, Chairman 

LAMAR SMITH, Texas 

PETER T. KING, New York 

MIKE ROGERS, Alabama 

LOU BARLETTA, Pennsylvania 

SCOTT PERRY, Pennsylvania 

JOHN KATKO, New York 

WILL HURD, Texas 

MARTHA MCSALLY, Arizona 

JOHN RATCLIFFE, Texas 

DANIEL M. DONOVAN, JR., New York 

MIKE GALLAGHER, Wisconsin 

CLAY HIGGINS, Louisiana 

JOHN H. RUTHERFORD, Florida 

THOMAS A. GARRETT, JR., Virginia 

BRIAN K. FITZPATRICK, Pennsylvania 

RON ESTES, Kansas 

DON BACON, Nebraska 

BENNIE G. THOMPSON, Mississippi 

SHEILA JACKSON LEE, Texas 

JAMES R. LANGEVIN, Rhode Island 

CEDRIC L. RICHMOND, Louisiana 

WILLIAM R. KEATING, Massachusetts 

DONALD M. PAYNE, JR., New Jersey 

FILEMON VELA, Texas 

BONNIE WATSON COLEMAN, New Jersey 

KATHLEEN M. RICE, New York 

J. LUIS CORREA, California 

VAL BUTLER DEMINGS, Florida 

NANETTE DIAZ BARRAGA ́ N, California 

BRENDAN P. SHIELDS, Staff Director 

STEVEN S. GIAIER, General Counsel 

MICHAEL S. TWINCHEK, Chief Clerk 

HOPE GOINS, Minority Staff Director 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION AND PROTECTIVE SECURITY 

JOHN KATKO, New York, Chairman 

MIKE ROGERS, Alabama 

CLAY HIGGINS, Louisiana 

BRIAN K. FITZPATRICK, Pennsylvania 

RON ESTES, Kansas 

MICHAEL T. MCCAUL, Texas (ex officio) 

BONNIE WATSON COLEMAN, New Jersey 

WILLIAM R. KEATING, Massachusetts 

DONALD M. PAYNE, JR., New Jersey 

BENNIE G. THOMPSON, Mississippi (ex officio) 

KYLE D. KLEIN, Subcommittee Staff Director 

(III) 

C O N T E N T S 

Page 

STATEMENTS 

The Honorable John Katko, a Representative in Congress From the State 

of New York, and Chairman, Subcommittee on Transportation and Protective Security: 

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

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

The Honorable Bonnie Watson Coleman, a Representative in Congress From 

the State of New Jersey, and Ranking Member, Subcommittee on Transportation and Protective Security: 

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

Prepared Statement ............................................................................................. 8 

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

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

Security: 

Prepared Statement ............................................................................................. 9 

WITNESSES 

PANEL I 

Mr. Darby LaJoye, Assistant Administrator, Office of Security Operations, 

Transportation Security Administration, U.S. Department of Homeland Security: 

Oral Statement ..................................................................................................... 10 

Prepared Statement ............................................................................................. 11 

Mr. William Russell, Acting Director, Homeland Security and Justice Team, 

U.S. Government Accountability Office: 

Oral Statement ..................................................................................................... 14 

Prepared Statement ............................................................................................. 15 

PANEL II 

Ms. Lorraine Howerton, Senior Director of Government Relations, U.S. Travel 

Association: 

Oral Statement ..................................................................................................... 33 

Prepared Statement ............................................................................................. 35 

Ms. Sharon L. Pinkerton, Senior Vice President, Legislative and Regulatory 

Policy, Airlines for America: 

Oral Statement ..................................................................................................... 38 

Prepared Statement ............................................................................................. 40 

Ms. Wendy Reiter, Director of Aviation Security, Seattle/Tacoma International Airport, Testifying on Behalf of The American Association of Airport Executives: 

Oral Statement ..................................................................................................... 44 

Prepared Statement ............................................................................................. 45 

Mr. Michael W. McCormick, Executive Director and Chief Operating Officer, 

Global Business Travel Association: 

Oral Statement ..................................................................................................... 48 

Prepared Statement ............................................................................................. 50 

Page

IV 

FOR THE RECORD 

The Honorable Bonnie Watson Coleman, a Representative in Congress From 

the State of New Jersey, and Ranking Member, Subcommittee on Transportation and Protective Security: 

Article .................................................................................................................... 5 

APPENDIX 

Questions From Honorable Bonnie Watson Coleman for Darby LaJoye ............ 61 

Questions From Ranking Member Watson Coleman for William Russell .......... 64 

Questions From Ranking Member Watson Coleman for Wendy Reiter .............. 64 

Questions From Ranking Member Watson Coleman for Michael W. McCormick ....................................................................................................................... 64 

(1) 

ASSESSING THE TSA CHECKPOINT: THE 

PRECHECK PROGRAM AND AIRPORT WAIT 

TIMES 

Thursday, May 17, 2018 

U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION

AND PROTECTIVE SECURITY, 

COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY, 

Washington, DC. 

The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:11 a.m., in room 

HVC–210, Capitol Visitor Center, Hon. John Katko (Chairman of 

the subcommittee) presiding. 

Present: Representatives Katko, Rogers, Fitzpatrick, Estes, Watson Coleman, and Keating. 

Mr. KATKO. OK. The Committee on Homeland Security Subcommittee on Transportation and Protective Security will come to 

order. Let me apologize for my delay today, this is I think my third 

or fourth meeting already today, so I am already behind and I 

apologize for that. The subcommittee is meeting today to assess the 

Transportation Security Administration’s preparedness for the approaching peak summer travel period. 

I now recognize myself for an opening statement. The summer 

months have historically seen an increase in aviation travels this 

year, and this year is no exception. Following a record-breaking 

2018 spring travel season, the warmer temperatures of summer are 

expected to draw even bigger passenger volumes. In fact, TSA is 

preparing for its busiest travel season ever, and expect to screen 

more than 243 million passengers and crew from Memorial Day 

through Labor Day. That is a stunning number. 

We have seen this situation before in 2016, when unprecedented 

passenger volumes overwhelmed checkpoints across the Nation. 

Many people missed flights due to wait times in excess of 75 minutes, although some reports contended that wait times were closer 

to 3 hours. Passengers shared photos and anecdotes on-line of 

seemingly interminable airport security lines and the hashtag 

iHateTheWait united disgruntled passengers across the country. 

History has a way of repeating itself, and TSA currently faces 

pressure from Congress, the public, and aviation stakeholders to 

avoid past mistakes. Therefore, the purpose of this hearing is to 

evaluate TSA’s preparedness to accommodate the demands of this 

year’s peak summer travel. TSA’s preparedness ultimately ensures 

the security of the traveling public, but efficient checkpoint operVerDate Mar 15 2010 12:29 Nov 01, 2018 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 H:\115TH CONGRESS\18TP0517\18TP0517.TXT HEATH
2 

ations also bolster the free movement of people and goods, which 

brings in billions of dollars to the U.S. economy each year. 

Conversely, as evidenced by the 2016 wait time crisis, the checkpoint can also be the chokepoint that prevents the aviation sector 

from functioning seamlessly. This in itself can prove to be an adverse security scenario in a time when threats to crowded spaces 

of public areas are an increasing concern. 

In short, all roads lead back to the checkpoint, which is why this 

hearing today is so important and so timely. While a variety of factors may have negatively impacted operations at individual airports, we can point to three major errors that helped to generate 

a perfect storm in 2016. 

First, TSA’s staffing allocation model did not accurately represent the unique needs or true operation conditions of individual 

airports. Compounded with a pervasive transportation security officer staffing shortage and high attrition rate, miscalculations prevented TSA from responding promptly to increase in—to increases 

in passenger wait times. 

Second, deficient communication between TSA and stakeholders 

resulted in missed opportunities to share flight schedules, staffing 

plans, and facility changes in real time. 

Third, TSA significantly overestimated the amount of passengers 

who would receive expedited screening by way of Trusted Traveler 

Programs like PreCheck or Global Entry. Specifically, TSA assumed that 50 percent of passengers would use expedited screening, but only about 27 percent of passengers used expedited screening in 2016, and we have got to work on that. 

Last Congress, the House and Senate passed my bill, the Checkpoint Optimization and Efficiency Act, to address the gridlock at 

airport checkpoints throughout the United States and boost enrollment in TSA PreCheck. I look forward to discussing how this legislation has impacted enrollment figures and how TSA plans to continue their expansion efforts. We are nowhere near where we need 

to be and we have got to get better at it. 

While TSA has come a long way since the wait times crisis in 

2016, I would be remiss if I did not acknowledge the similarities 

between the conditions today and the conditions 2 years ago. Passenger volume continues to grow by about 4 percent a year, and 

TSA’s staffing has not kept pace. Despite TSA’s concerted efforts to 

recruit and retain quality TSOs, the TSO attrition rate continues 

to be troubling and has a direct impact on the availability of 

screening lanes at airports. 

In turn, the limited availability of screening lanes translate to 

longer checkpoint wait times and an increasing reliance on expedited screening measures to facilitate throughput. Lately, despite 

vocal disapproval from this subcommittee, TSA has been granting 

PreCheck status to passengers who have not enrolled in the program in an effort to reduce congestion at checkpoints. I myself have 

personally witnessed this on many occasions. 

I have repeatedly expressed to TSA that PreCheck should not be 

used to manage traffic, especially under the guise of risk-based security. In the near future, I will be introducing legislation to ensure that PreCheck lanes are available only to PreCheck passengers in PreCheck or another Trusted Traveler Program. 

3 

PreCheck, when used as designed, is a valuable tool that enables 

TSA to assess a passenger’s risk to aviation security prior to their 

arrival at an airport checkpoint. By providing expedited screening 

to pre-vetted populations, TSA can direct additional TSOs to standard lanes to screen unknown travelers. PreCheck and other Trusted Traveler Programs when used as designed—not as currently implemented—are undoubtedly some of the best tools in TSA’s toolbox. 

However, TSA’s efforts to increase enrollment, participation in 

the PreCheck program has stagnated after reaching nearly 6 million travelers. Undoubtedly, many passengers are frustrated by 

TSA’s frivolous practice of merging non-enrolled travelers into 

PreCheck screening lanes and disappointed in the limited availability of PreCheck lanes in many airports. 

The efficient operation of airport checkpoints combined with effective management of the PreCheck program go hand-in-hand 

when it comes to the overall security mission of TSA. That is why 

I am pleased to have two distinguished panels here today from 

both the public and private sectors representing a diversity of perspectives on this issue, and I look forward to hearing from them 

on how we can move all forward, in a collaborative spirit, to provide better, more efficient security to the American people. 

I would like to thank Mr. Darby LaJoye and Mr. Bill Russell, 

who—as well as our second panel—for appearing before this subcommittee today to discuss this important topic. 

[The statement of Chairman Katko follows:] 

STATEMENT OF CHAIRMAN JOHN KATKO

MAY 17, 2018 

The summer months have historically seen an increase in aviation travel, and this 

year is no exception. Following a record-breaking 2018 spring travel season, the 

warmer temperatures of summer are expected to draw even bigger passenger volumes. In fact, TSA is preparing for its busiest travel season ever and expects to 

screen more than 243 million passengers and crew from Memorial Day through 

Labor Day. 

We’ve seen this situation before in 2016 when unprecedented passenger volumes 

overwhelmed checkpoints across the Nation. Many people missed flights due to wait 

times in excess of 75 minutes, although some reports contended that wait times 

were closer to 3 hours. Passengers shared photos and anecdotes on-line of seemingly 

interminable airport security lines, and the hashtag, #HateTheWait, united disgruntled passengers across the country. 

History has a way of repeating itself, and TSA currently faces pressure from Congress, the public, and aviation stakeholders to avoid past mistakes. Therefore, the 

purpose of this hearing is to evaluate TSA’s preparedness to accommodate the demands of this year’s peak summer travel. 

TSA’s preparedness ultimately ensures the security of the traveling public, but efficient checkpoint operations also bolster the free movement of people and goods, 

which brings in billions of dollars to the U.S. economy each year. Conversely, as evidenced by the 2016 wait times crisis, the checkpoint can also be the choke point 

that prevents the aviation sector from functioning seamlessly. 

This, in itself, can prove to be an adverse security scenario, in a time when 

threats to crowded spaces of public areas are an increasing concern. In short, all 

roads lead back to the checkpoint, which is why this hearing today is so important 

and timely. 

While a variety of factors may have negatively impacted operations at individual 

airports, we can point to three major errors that helped to generate a perfect storm 

in 2016. 

First, TSA’s staffing allocation model did not accurately represent the unique 

needs or true operating conditions of individual airports. Compounded with a pervasive Transportation Security Officer (TSO) staffing shortage and high attrition rate, 

4 

miscalculations prevented TSA from responding promptly to increases in passenger 

wait times. 

Second, deficient communication between TSA and stakeholders resulted in 

missed opportunities to share flight schedules, staffing plans, and facility changes 

in real time. 

Third, TSA significantly overestimated the amount of passengers who would receive expedited screening by way of trusted traveler programs like PreCheck or 

Global Entry. Specifically, TSA assumed that 50 percent of passengers would use 

expedited screening, but only about 27 percent of passengers used expedited screening in 2016. Last Congress, the House and Senate passed my bill, the Checkpoint 

Optimization and Efficiency Act, to address the gridlock at airport checkpoints 

throughout the United States and boost enrollment in TSA PreCheck. I look forward 

to discussing how this legislation has impacted enrollment figures and how TSA 

plans to continue expansion efforts. 

While TSA has come a long way since the wait times crisis in 2016, I would be 

remiss if I did not acknowledge the similarities between the conditions today and 

the conditions 2 years ago. Passenger volume continues to grow by about 4 percent 

each year and TSO staffing has not kept pace. Despite TSA’s concerted efforts to 

recruit and retain quality TSOs, the TSO attrition rate continues to be troubling 

and has a direct impact on the availability of screening lanes at airports. In turn, 

the limited availability of screening lanes translates to longer checkpoint wait times 

and an increased reliance on expedited screening measures to facilitate throughput. 

Lately, despite vocal disapproval from this subcommittee, TSA has been granting 

PreCheck status to passengers who have not enrolled in the program in an effort 

to reduce congestion at checkpoints. I have repeatedly expressed to TSA that 

PreCheck should not be used to manage traffic, especially under the guise of riskbased security. In the near future, I will be introducing legislation to ensure that 

PreCheck lanes are available only to passengers enrolled in PreCheck or another 

Trusted Traveler Program. PreCheck, when used as designed, is a valuable tool that 

enables TSA to assess a passenger’s risk to aviation security prior to their arrival 

at an airport checkpoint. By providing expedited screening to pre-vetted populations, 

TSA can direct additional TSOs to standard lanes to screen unknown travelers. 

PreCheck and other Trusted Traveler Programs, when used as designed, are undoubtedly some of the best tools in TSA’s toolbox. However, despite TSA’s efforts 

to increase enrollment, participation in the PreCheck program has stagnated after 

reaching nearly 6 million travelers. Undoubtedly, many passengers are frustrated 

by TSA’s frivolous practice of merging non-enrolled travelers into PreCheck screening lanes and disappointed in the limited availability of PreCheck lanes at many 

airports. 

The efficient operation of airport checkpoints, combined with effective management of the PreCheck program, go hand-in-hand when it comes to the overall security mission of TSA. That is why I am pleased to have two distinguished panels here 

today from both the public and private sectors, representing a diversity of perspectives, and I look forward to hearing how we can all move forward in a collaborative 

spirit to provide better, more efficient security to the American people. 

Mr. KATKO. I am pleased to recognize the Ranking Member of 

this subcommittee, the gentlelady from New Jersey, Ms. Watson 

Coleman, for her opening statement. 

Ms. WATSON COLEMAN. Good morning and thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you for holding this hearing, and I want to thank the 

witnesses for both panels for agreeing to be here today. It is good 

to have TSA here, because your work is so important and we always have so many questions and things are always sort-of very 

dynamic and moving along. 

TSA has, however, had a long struggle with how to more sufficiently and effectively manage its resources. In 2011, TSA introduced the PreCheck program for low-risk passengers who provide 

fingerprints and undergo background checks to receive expedited 

screening—security screening. Used in combination with intelligence and watchlist-matching programs, PreCheck allows TSA to 

focus its limited screening resources more effectively. 

The PreCheck program has, however, had some setbacks. Unfortunately, by 2013, TSA’s efforts to drive more passenger traffic into 

5 

PreCheck lanes caused it to adopt a practice known as the Managed Inclusion, which rely heavily upon behavior detection officers 

and iPod randomizing apps to expedite screening for large members of—numbers of passengers who had not enrolled in PreCheck. 

Last Congress, Ranking Member Thompson introduced a bill to 

curtail the use of Managed Inclusion, and after the bill passed the 

House, then-Administrator Neffenger directed that the practice be 

phased out. 

Although Managed Inclusion came to an end in September, 2015, 

TSA continues to use passenger screening K–9s and other tools to 

pre-scan—to prescreen passengers who have not enrolled in 

PreCheck and provide them access to expedited screening. 

TSA has said it intends to modify these practices. Given the 

evolving threat landscape, it must do so expeditiously. Every passenger must receive an appropriate level of screening. TSA must 

also address the underlying factors that have led to these practices. 

TSA has cited a lack of enrollment in PreCheck and other DHS 

Trusted Traveler Programs as one reason for their development. 

However, these practices may provide a disincentive for those who 

would otherwise consider enrolling in PreCheck, thus inhibiting the 

growth of the program. 

TSA has struggled to partner with industry effectively to encourage creative enrollment solutions, as the agency withdrew a request for proposals in 2016 citing ‘‘cybersecurity concerns.’’ I encourage TSA to work through these concerns and issue a new solicitation. 

In addition, TSA has cited growing passenger volume and a lack 

of sufficient staffing as major challenges. In the summer of 2016, 

we saw unacceptably long wait lines—wait times at TSA checkpoints, as staffing levels were insufficient to process the number of 

travelers. TSA has increased its staff since that time, but it has not 

kept pace with increases in passenger volumes, and the President’s 

fiscal year 2019 budget proposal does not request enough staff to 

close the gap. 

I hope future TSA budget proposals will be more realistic when 

it comes to staffing levels. By increasing Trusted Traveler Program 

enrollments and staffing levels, TSA could take another step forward in developing a risk-based security model. Excuse me. 

I also want to mention an article from this morning’s New York 

Times, which I would like to enter into the record, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. KATKO. Without objection, so ordered. 

[The information follows:] 

ARTICLE SUBMITTED BY HONORABLE BONNIE WATSON COLEMAN

WATCH LIST SHIELDS T.S.A. SCREENERS FROM THREATENING, AND UNRULY, TRAVELERS

By Ron Nixon, May 17, 2018. 

WASHINGTON.—The Transportation Security Administration has created a new 

secret watch list to monitor people who may be targeted as potential threats at airport checkpoints simply because they have swatted away security screeners’ hands 

or otherwise appeared unruly. 

A five-page directive obtained by The New York Times said actions that pose physical danger to security screeners—or other contact that the agency described as ‘‘offensive and without legal justification’’—could land travelers on the watch list, 

which was created in February and is also known as a ‘‘95 list.’’ 

6 

‘‘An intent to injure or cause physical pain is not required, nor is an actual physical injury,’’ according to the directive that was issued in March by Darby LaJoye, 

the agency’s assistant administrator for security operations. 

The existence of the new watch list, which has not previously been disclosed, is 

expected to be discussed Thursday at a House homeland security subcommittee 

hearing. 

So far, the names of fewer than 50 people have been put on the watch list, said 

Kelly Wheaton, a T.S.A. deputy chief counsel. 

But two other government security officials who are familiar with the new watch 

list, describing it on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized 

to discuss it, said that the number of names on the list could be higher, with travelers added daily. 

According to the directive, people who loiter suspiciously near security checkpoints 

could be put on the watch list. So could those who present what the document 

vaguely described as ‘‘challenges to the safe and effective completion of screening.’’ 

The guidelines prohibit profiling based on race, religion or gender, and said those 

categories could not be used as the sole reason for including a passenger on the 

watch list. But the directive said such factors could be used when they are relevant 

and fit specific intelligence. 

However, on its own, the watch list cannot be used to prevent passengers from 

boarding flights, nor can it impel extra screening at security checkpoints, according 

to the document. That has raised questions about whether it serves a legitimate security purpose, and has heightened civil liberty concerns over the added government 

surveillance. 

‘‘If I’m running late, having a bad day and I’m rude to the screeners, do I get put 

on the list?’’ said Fred Burton, the chief security officer at Stratfor, a global intelligence company in Austin, Tex. 

‘‘The bottom line is that in the post 9/11 world, do we really need another watch 

list—particularly one from the T.S.A., which is not an intelligence agency?’’ said Mr. 

Burton, a former deputy chief of counterterrorism at the State Department’s Diplomatic Security Service. 

Mr. Wheaton said the new list aims to protect airport security screeners from 

travelers who previously have been demonstrably unruly at, or near, checkpoints. 

He said screeners were assaulted 34 times last year, up from 26 in 2016. 

Matthew F. Leas, a T.S.A. spokesman, said in an email that the agency ‘‘wants 

to ensure there are safeguards in place to protect Transportation Security Officers 

(TSOs) and others from any individual who has previously exhibited disruptive or 

assaultive behavior at a screening checkpoint and is scheduled to fly.’’ 

The United States government maintains a bevy of watch lists. 

The most well-known, maintained by the F.B.I., is a large database of the names 

of more than one million people—including tens of thousands of American citizens 

or legal residents—who are known or suspected terrorists. Officials rely on that 

database to compile the no-fly list that has been criticized for barring travelers 

based on mistaken identities, including prominent politicians, celebrities and young 

children. 

The Secret Service maintains a watch list of people who pose a potential threat 

to government officials or buildings. It publicly discloses the types of information it 

collects in the database, but not the names that are on it. 

But the new T.S.A. database, according to people familiar with it, includes travelers who have simply had a verbal altercation with security officers or have taken 

other actions that the agency said interferes in the screening process. 

Civil liberties groups said that makes it even more likely that individuals who do 

pose not pose a threat to airports or planes will be swept up in the United States’ 

homeland security system. 

‘‘While people on the list are not necessarily subject to additional scrutiny, it 

seems likely that agents would single them out for additional attention, and there 

is no way to get off the list,’’ said Faiza Patel, a director of the Liberty and National 

Security Program at New York University’s Brennan Center for Justice. 

She said that because the watch list will be shared with other law enforcement 

agencies, ‘‘it will be difficult to control the consequences.’’ 

Federal security directors, top T.S.A. security officials at airports and top Air Marshals supervisors can nominate individuals to be put on the watch list. Only the 

T.S.A. administrator, his deputy and the top two officials at the agency’s Office of 

Intelligence and Analysis may add or remove people from the database. 

The directive obtained by The Times does not specify how members of the public 

can appeal being included on the list. 

Government watchdogs have long criticized such watch lists, especially after evidence concluding that as high as 35 percent of the names that are designated for 

7 

inclusion are either outdated or added without adequate factual basis. Individuals 

are denied any meaningful way to correct errors and clear their names. 

In recent years, the government has established rules that are intended to prevent intelligence agencies from keeping secretive, open-ended watch lists based on 

suspicions that are ultimately unfounded. 

The T.S.A. security operations have long been criticized for targeting racial and 

religious minorities for extra screening. A number of African-American women have 

said screeners have searched their hair, even after the agency said the practice was 

halted. 

Most recently, the agency apologized to Navdeep Bains, Canada’s minister of innovation, science and economic development, after he was repeatedly asked by screeners at the Detroit Metropolitan Airport to remove his turban. Mr. Bains, who was 

in the United States to deliver a speech, is a Sikh whose religion requires him to 

wear a turban. 

The agency later admitted that surveillance video showed that the screener did 

not follow standard operating procedures, and said that screeners had received additional training as a result of the episode. 

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/17/us/politics/new-watch-list-tsa-screeners- 

.html. 

Ms. WATSON COLEMAN. Thank you. This article discusses a secret watch list that TSA maintains to monitor people who may be 

potential threats at airport checkpoints on the grounds that they 

may appear suspicious or rowdy. I look forward to hearing more 

from TSA about this watch list, as I am concerned about the civil 

liberty implications of such a list. 

Finally, at a hearing where we were—are discussing passenger 

volumes with travel industry experts, I would be remiss if I did not 

note some disturbing trends in recent travel data. While domestic 

travel continues to increase, the same cannot be said of international travel to the United States. According to the Department 

of Commerce, in just the first 3 months of the—Trump’s presidency, nearly 700,000 fewer foreign travelers visited the United 

States than normal, representing a 4.2 percent decrease and a loss 

of $2.7 billion in spending. 

Over the first 9 months of 2017, U.S. arrivals dropped by 1.4 percent, despite international travel increasing world-wide by 4.6 percent. It is plain and obvious that the President’s rhetoric and policies are having a depressing effect on the desire of foreign travelers 

to visit our beautiful country. 

His racially- and religiously-motivated travel bans, his obsession 

with building a wall and separating children from their mothers at 

the border, and his disparaging remarks toward the people of Mexico, Haiti, El Salvador, and the entire continent of Africa hurt our 

country’s reputation and sends the message that outsiders are not 

welcome here. Just yesterday, he called immigrants ‘‘animals,’’ disrespectful, dangerous language that should never be spoken by a 

President. 

Tourism represents the seventh-largest employer in the United 

States, as international travel supports 1.2 million American jobs, 

accounting for $32.4 billion in wages. I look forward to discussing 

with our travel industry witnesses that are here today how the 

President has put their industry at risk. 

Again, I thank my Chairman and our witnesses for coming, and 

I yield back the balance of my time. 

[The statement of Ranking Member Watson Coleman follows:] 

8 

STATEMENT OF RANKING MEMBER BONNIE WATSON COLEMAN

MAY 17, 2018 

TSA has long struggled with how to most efficiently and effectively manage its 

resources. In 2011, TSA introduced the PreCheck program for low-risk passengers 

who provide fingerprints and undergo background checks to receive expedited security screening. 

Used in combination with intelligence and watchlist-matching programs, 

PreCheck allows TSA to focus its limited screening resources more effectively. The 

PreCheck program has had some setbacks. 

Unfortunately, by 2013, TSA’s efforts to drive more passenger traffic into 

PreCheck lanes caused it to adopt a practice known as ‘‘Managed Inclusion’’ which 

relied heavily upon Behavior Detection Officers and iPad randomizing apps to expedite screening for large numbers of passengers who had not enrolled in PreCheck. 

Last Congress, Ranking Member Thompson introduced a bill to curtail the use of 

Managed Inclusion, and after the bill passed the House, then-Administrator 

Neffenger directed that the practice be phased out. 

Although Managed Inclusion came to an end in September 2015, TSA continues 

to use Passenger Screening Canines and other tools to pre-screen passengers who 

have not enrolled in PreCheck and provide them access to expedited screening. 

TSA has said it intends to modify these practices. Given the evolving threat landscape, it must do so expeditiously. Every passenger must receive an appropriate 

level of screening. TSA must also address the underlying factors that have led to 

these practices. 

TSA has cited a lack of enrollments in PreCheck and other DHS Trusted Traveler 

Programs as one reason for their development. 

However, these practices may provide a disincentive for those who otherwise may 

consider enrolling in PreCheck, thus inhibiting the growth of the program. 

TSA has struggled to partner with industry effectively to encourage creative enrollment solutions, as the agency withdrew a request for proposals in 2016 citing 

cybersecurity concerns. 

I encourage TSA to work through those concerns and issue a new solicitation. 

In addition, TSA has cited growing passenger volume and a lack of sufficient 

staffing as major challenges. 

In the summer of 2016, we saw unacceptably long wait times at TSA checkpoints, 

as staffing levels were insufficient to process the number of travelers. 

TSA has increased its staff since that time, but it has not kept pace with increases in passenger volumes, and the President’s fiscal year 2019 budget proposal 

does not request enough staff to close the gap. 

I hope future TSA budget proposals will be more realistic when it comes to staffing levels. 

By increasing Trusted Traveler Program enrollments and staffing levels, TSA 

could take another step forward in developing a risk-based security model. 

I also want to mention an article from this morning’s New York Times, which I’d 

like to enter into the record. This article discusses a ‘‘secret watch list’’ that TSA 

maintains to monitor people who may be potential threats at airport checkpoints on 

the grounds that they may appear suspicious or unruly. 

I look forward to hearing more from TSA about this watch list, as I am concerned 

about the civil liberty implications of such a list. 

Finally, at a hearing where we are discussing passenger volumes with travel industry experts, I would be remiss if I did not note some disturbing trends in recent 

travel data. 

While domestic travel continues to increase, the same cannot be said of international travel to the United States. 

According to the Department of Commerce, in just the first 3 months of Donald 

Trump’s presidency, nearly 700,000 fewer foreign travelers visited the United States 

than normal, representing a 4.2 percent decrease and a loss of $2.7 billion in spending. 

Over the first 9 months of 2017, U.S. arrivals dropped by 1.4 percent despite 

international travel increasing world-wide by 4.6 percent. 

It is plain and obvious that the President’s rhetoric and policies are having a depressing effect on the desire of foreign travelers to visit our beautiful country. 

His racially- and religiously-motivated travel bans, his obsession with building a 

wall and separating children from their mothers at the border, and his disparaging 

remarks toward the people of Mexico, Haiti, El Salvador, and the entire continent 

of Africa hurt our country’s reputation and send the message that outsiders are not 

welcome here. 

9 

Just yesterday, he called immigrants ‘‘animals’’—disrespectful, dangerous language that should never be spoken by a President. 

Tourism represents the seventh-largest employer in the United States, as inter- national travel supports 1.2 million American jobs, accounting for $32.4 billion in 

wages. I look forward to discussing with our travel industry witnesses how the 

President has put their industry at risk. 

Mr. KATKO. Thank you, Mrs. Watson Coleman. All the Members 

of this subcommittee are reminded that opening statements may be 

submitted for the record. 

[The statement of Ranking Member Thompson follows:] 

STATEMENT OF RANKING MEMBER BENNIE G. THOMPSON

MAY 17, 2018 

I certainly appreciate the challenging job that TSA has in accommodating the increase in domestic travelers while striving to maintain the safe, secure, and reliable 

air transit that the flying public expects and deserves. Long wait times at airports 

do not just create an unpleasant flying experience, but present broader security concerns as crowded checkpoints can quickly become soft targets. 

While I understand that TSA must find creative approaches to strike that difficult 

balance, I do echo many of the Chairman’s concerns regarding the inclusion of 

unvetted individuals in the PreCheck program. I addressed some of these concerns 

last Congress, when I introduced the ‘‘Securing Expedited Screening Act’’ with 

Chairman Katko and then-Subcommittee on Transportation Protective Security 

Ranking Member Kathleen Rice. 

This legislation sought to address security vulnerabilities in how TSA drove traffic 

to PreCheck lanes by restricting access to expedited airport security screening to 

PreCheck program participants and other ‘‘known’’ or vetted passengers. After the 

bill passed the House in July 2015, TSA ended the practice known as ‘‘Managed Inclusion.’’ However, TSA has more work to do. 

While I am fully committed to working with TSA to avoid wait times like we saw 

in the summer of 2016, I do believe that expedited screening should be limited to 

those who are thoroughly vetted. I look forward to hearing TSA’s plans for getting 

us to a place where this is a reality. 

Additionally, while I am pleased that domestic travel continues to grow and interested in hearing TSA’s plans to accommodate this growth, I am troubled by the 

downturn in international travel to the United States. I hope to gain more perspective on this recent concerning trend from industry stakeholders present here today. 

Mr. KATKO. We are pleased to have two distinguished panels of 

witnesses before us today. Let me remind the witnesses that your 

entire written statement will be—will appear in the record. 

On our first panel, we are pleased to have Mr. Darby LaJoye, the 

assistant administrator for TSA’s Office of Security Operations, 

here to testify before us today on this critical topic. In his role as 

assistant administrator, Mr. LaJoye oversees airport checkpoints 

and baggage screening operations, regulatory compliance, cargo inspections, and other specialized programs designed to secure transportation. 

Previously, Mr. LaJoye served as a Federal security director of 

Los Angeles, and was responsible for Los Angeles International 

Airport, Ontario International Airport, and Palm Springs International Airport, with intermodal responsibilities throughout 

Southern California and Hawaii. He also served as the Federal security director at John F. Kennedy International Airport in New 

York, and before joining TSA, Mr. LaJoye was in the U.S. Army 

in various light infantry and airborne units—just like my son, who 

is going to—going to Ranger school in about a month. 

Sir, thank you for your service to this country and for continuing 

your service in your current role. You are now recognized for 5 

minutes for an opening statement. 

10 

STATEMENT OF DARBY LAJOYE, ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATOR, 

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

Mr. LAJOYE. Good afternoon, Chairman Katko, Ranking Member 

Watson Coleman, and distinguished Members of the subcommittee. 

Thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today, along 

with Mr. Bill Russell of the Government Accountability Office, to 

discuss the Transportation Security Administration’s approach to 

the upcoming summer travel season and TSA PreCheck. 

As the executive assistant administrator for security operations, 

I am responsible for overseeing the TSA’s front-line employees who 

are charged with ensuring the free movement of people and commerce while safeguarding the traveling public from a determined 

and dynamic adversary. 

Last year’s terrorist plot in Australia reminds us of what we 

have known for some time. The threat to aviation is as real as 

ever. Current intelligence indicates that commercial aviation remains a top-priority target, and our adversaries continue to educate their followers on building and concealing explosives to evade 

checkpoint security measures. Meanwhile, a pattern of less sophisticated techniques and tactics has also emerged. 

In short, attacks today may be sophisticated and well-planned 

with a goal of causing massive global economic impacts or impromptu acts with little preparation other than the desire to inflict 

damage and create fear. The atrocities at Brussels International 

Airport and Istanbul Ataturk Airport in 2016, as well as attacks 

in Nice, Paris, Stockholm, Hamburg, Barcelona, London, and Manhattan highlight the evolving tactics and techniques employed by 

terrorists that target civilians in public areas. 

The global intelligence and security community, including the 

aviation security community, must continually reassess our detection and disruption tactics. 

At the same time, the world’s reliance on the aviation network 

to facilitate the movement of people and goods continues to grow. 

On an average day in 2017, TSA officers came into contact with 

nearly 2.1 million travelers at one of more than 440 Federalized 

airports Nation-wide. And travel volumes continue to increase. 

While TSA continues to achieve its objectives, meeting growing demands comes at the cost of training and personal leave requirements for our officers. Those tradeoffs ultimately impact morale, 

turnover, and performance. The additional 717 officers included in 

the fiscal year 2019 budget request will help address the current 

shortfall. 

TSA is now preparing for what is projected to be one of the agency’s busiest summer seasons on record. To ensure there are sufficient officers available to meet the summer demand, TSA has conducted hiring events at hard-to-hire and high-volume airports, increased advertising and media outreach to recruit new hires, and 

improved the hiring and new employee training processes. These 

efforts will ensure TSA’s position to effectively meet projected 

screening demands this summer, while mitigating passenger wait 

times at our checkpoints. 

11 

In addition to ensuring availability of staff to meet increased passenger volumes, both K–9s and enhanced technology will play an 

integral role in TSA’s checkpoint strategy. This summer, TSA expects an additional 50 operational passenger screening K–9 teams 

as compared to July 2017. Along with expanded K–9 use, TSA has 

committed to enhancing checkpoint screening for the strategic deployment of new and effective technology. 

Presently, TSA is in the process of testing computed tomography 

screening systems for use at domestic airport checkpoints. We expect to have approximately 35 systems deployed at our labs, in our 

training centers, or at our airports over the course of the summer. 

Another effective tool to assist with checkpoint efficiency is a 

comprehensive Trusted Traveler Program. Currently, there are 

more than 13 million travelers in DHS Trusted Traveler Programs, 

including 6.4 million enrolled in TSA PreCheck. Since 2014, we 

have seen the Trusted Traveler population increase by 500 percent. 

TSA is also focusing on expanding vetting capabilities and implementing innovative technology procedures that will allow us to 

move to a fundamentally more dynamic system of segmenting passengers according to risk and applying the appropriate level of 

screening. 

In closing, TSA remains dedicated to securing the Nation’s transportation systems from terrorist attacks. We will continue to improve transportation security through a committed work force and 

the development and implementation of intelligence-driven riskbased policies and plans. 

I appreciate the subcommittee’s continued support of the TSA 

mission, and thank you for the opportunity to appear before you 

today. I look forward to—look forward to answering your questions. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. LaJoye follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF DARBY LAJOYE

MAY 17, 2018 

INTRODUCTION

Chairman Katko, Ranking Member Watson Coleman, and Members of the subcommittee, thank you for the invitation to testify today regarding the Transportation Security Administration’s (TSA) PreCheck program and our preparations for 

the upcoming summer travel season. TSA appreciates the subcommittee’s oversight 

and commitment to ensuring the agency has the tools it needs to accomplish its mission. TSA continues its efforts to raise the global baseline of aviation security. The 

agency is leading by example through intelligence-driven operations, layered security, and enhanced passenger and crew vetting. 

TSA’s most important job, as a National security organization, is to protect the 

traveling public and ensure freedom of movement for people and commerce. The adversary we face is determined and committed. The threat to transportation within 

our country, and around the globe, is real and dynamic. TSA addresses this threat 

by strengthening operations through developing and maintaining a committed workforce, refining its processes, and testing and deploying new technology to improve 

performance. Noting such, it is imperative to recognize that the essential element 

of our agency’s overarching success rests upon having dedicated, well-trained professionals executing our front-line mission. Our Transportation Security Officers demonstrate exceptional skills, professionalism, and diligence in meeting the various demands of their jobs while serving the traveling public on a daily basis. However, 

as travel levels continue to increase and outpace predictions, TSA’s workforce is 

challenged to meet the demands of passenger growth. Meeting these demands comes 

at the cost of the training and personal leave requirements of our officers. Those 

trade-offs ultimately impact morale, turnover, and performance. The additional 717 

12 

screeners included in the fiscal year 2019 budget request will help address the current shortfall. 

SUMMER TRAVEL SEASON EFFORTS

TSA recently completed a record-breaking spring travel season. From March 15 

to April 15, 2018, TSA screened more than 72 million passengers and crew members 

and nearly 45 million checked bags Nation-wide. This represents an increase of 5 

percent over the spring of 2017. We successfully screened more people and bags 

than any previous Spring Break travel period. Ninety-five percent of all passengers 

waited less than 20 minutes at the checkpoint and nearly 93 percent of passengers 

who were in a TSA PreCheck lane waited less than 5 minutes. Notably, during this 

time, TSA was also in the process of completing the Nation-wide roll-out of enhanced screening procedures for carry-on baggage. These new measures, which 

began at a handful of airports in late summer 2017 and are now fully rolled out, 

are part of our effort to raise the global baseline for aviation security and to meet 

evolving threats to aviation. 

TSA is now preparing for what promises to be one of the agency’s busiest summer 

seasons on record. From the Memorial Day through Labor Day holidays, TSA expects to screen more than 243 million passengers and crew members, an increase 

of 4 percent over the summer of 2017. To ensure there are sufficient officers available to meet the summer rush, TSA conducted several Transportation Security officer hiring events at hard-to-hire and high-volume airports, increased advertising 

and media outreach to recruit new hires, and improved the timeliness of the hiring 

and new employee training processes. From a workforce capacity perspective, TSA 

kept pace with attrition and increased our front-line workforce by 620 officers since 

the beginning of the year. Further, we plan to bring more than 1,000 additional officers into our ranks before the peak of this summer’s travel season in July. TSA regularly monitors wait times on an on-going basis and is prepared to address challenges that may arise at particular airports. Although TSA will still have a workforce capacity gap, these hiring efforts, coupled with additional overtime resources, 

will ensure TSA is positioned to effectively meet projected screening demands this 

summer while mitigating wait times. 

CANINE DEPLOYMENT

In addition to ensuring the availability of staff to meet increased passenger levels, 

canines are also an integral part of TSA’s checkpoint strategy. Passenger Screening 

Canine (PSC) teams are an essential element of effective and efficient checkpoint 

screening. This summer, TSA expects to field an additional 50 operational PSC 

teams compared to July 2017. TSA also augments its PSC teams by providing resources for another 675 State and local canine teams, which are used for security 

in airport public areas as well as other modes of transportation. The fiscal year 2019 

budget request supports 1,047 canine teams, including 372 PSC teams as well as 

675 State and local ones. With passenger levels rising, TSA believes that PSC teams 

are a cost-effective resource to meet increasing demands and that growth in this capability is important for future years. 

TECHNOLOGY

Another element of our strategy for improving checkpoint operations is through 

enhancing technology. Presently, TSA is in the process of testing Computed Tomography (CT) screening systems for use at domestic airport checkpoints. Use of CT at 

the airport checkpoint will enhance the ability for TSOs to examine carry-on baggage, reduce false alarms, and improve the detection of prohibited items. The CT 

program is currently on track with developmental and operational testing and we 

expect to have approximately 35 systems deployed at our test labs, in our training 

centers, or at airports over the course of the summer. Depending on the timing of 

appropriations, deployment could begin early in calendar year 2019. Similarly, TSA 

is working to deploy Credential Authentication Technology (CAT) units, which are 

designed to improve the travel document checker function at security checkpoints. 

Forty-two of these units are currently being tested in select TSA PreCheck lanes 

at 13 airports across the Nation. 

PASSENGER EXPERIENCE: @ASKTSA AND TSA SOCIAL MEDIA

TSA recognizes the American public is a key stakeholder in our security mission, 

and that informing passengers ahead of time helps prepare them for the screening 

process and improves the overall passenger experience. TSA’s social media presence 

continues to grow and has become a valuable customer service tool. For example, 

13 

our internationally-recognized and award-winning Instagram account, which has 

more than 865,000 followers, highlights prohibited items that are intercepted at the 

checkpoint. 

Through the AskTSA on-line platforms, TSA’s social care team monitors the 

@AskTSA Twitter and Facebook messenger accounts to address passengers inquires 

in real time, 365 days a year. To date, TSA has received and responded to more 

than 450,000 questions from the traveling public via its AskTSA accounts. This includes more than 110,000 questions on what passengers can bring on planes, more 

than 33,000 inquiries on TSA PreCheck including Known Traveler Number resolution, and more than 12,000 responses to help passengers with disabilities and medical conditions with the security screening process. TSA’s customer-centric, mobile 

compliant website, TSA.gov, gets more than 7 million views each month. The recently-revised agency app, MyTSA, has added features such as TSA PreCheck 

checkpoint hours, a graph predicating how busy airport checkpoints will be based 

on historical data, live assistance with AskTSA, and a searchable database of items 

that can be placed in carry-on and checked baggage. These efforts aim to make the 

traveling process more transparent and easier to navigate for the traveling public. 

RISK-BASED PASSENGER SCREENING AND TSA PRECHECK

In 2011, TSA launched a risk-based approach to vetting and passenger security 

screening. Instead of employing a one-size-fits-all approach to passenger security 

screening, the agency’s design is to spend less time with individuals we know more 

about while focusing a greater proportion of our security resources on unknown passengers. TSA PreCheck is a voluntary, expedited security screening program connecting low-risk travelers departing from the United States with smarter security 

and a better air travel experience. TSA PreCheck is one of a number of Department 

of Homeland Security Trusted Traveler programs that allow enrolled individuals to 

use expedited lanes when crossing international borders, and at the airport. 

TSA plans to dedicate our TSA PreCheck lanes at airports to pre-vetted and enrolled Trusted Traveler passengers. TSA is taking a multi-faceted approach to 

achieve that goal. First, the agency is focusing on expanding vetting and notification 

capabilities. Second, TSA is working to implement technology enhancements to improve credential authentication and passenger verification. Finally, we are examining our screening measures and looking at other innovative ways to quickly differentiate passengers based on their level of risk. 

TSA PreCheck marketing efforts are designed to increase traveler awareness and 

encourage enrollments in the program. By increasing the percentage of travelers 

that have been vetted and are known to be of lesser risk, TSA will be better-positioned to provide those individuals with an expedited checkpoint experience while 

also applying a greater portion of its resources to those passengers that require a 

greater level of screening at the checkpoint. 

TSA has and continues to engage industry to identify private-sector capabilities 

to improve traveler identity verification and increase the public’s enrollment access 

to TSA PreCheck. To increase the number of Trusted Travelers, TSA has engaged 

in a marketing program for TSA PreCheck consisting of a paid advertising campaign, as well as on-going outreach, marketing, and communications initiatives with 

stakeholders from industry and our other TSA PreCheck eligible trusted traveler, 

pre-vetted programs. Many of our airline stakeholders and their associated credit 

card partners offer incentives for members to join TSA PreCheck. 

Currently, there are more than 13 million travelers in DHS Trusted Travel Programs, including 6.4 million enrolled in TSA PreCheck. Since 2014, we have seen 

the Trusted Traveler population increase by 500 percent. There has also been substantial increase in TSA PreCheck as well. As you may know, the program launched 

with two airlines in four airports. Today, more than 50 airlines participate in the 

program and TSA has implemented TSA PreCheck lanes at more than 200 airports. 

We thank the Members of this subcommittee who have demonstrated an interest 

in helping TSA achieve its goal of making our security measures more effective and 

adaptable. We are constantly looking at innovations to facilitate enrollments and 

screening to achieve more effective utilization of TSA PreCheck lane operations. 

CONCLUSION

TSA is remains dedicated to securing the Nation’s transportation systems from 

terrorist attacks. We are focused on improving transportation security through the 

development and implementation of intelligence-driven, risk-based policies and 

plans. I appreciate the subcommittee’s support of TSA’s mission. Thank you for the 

opportunity to appear before you today. I look forward to answering your questions. 

14 

Mr. KATKO. Thank you very much, Mr. LaJoye, and I appreciate 

you staying under the time limit. That is not always the way, so 

thank you very much. 

No pressure on you, Mr. Russell. 

All right, our second witness is Mr. Bill Russell, the acting director of the U.S. Government Accountability Office’s Homeland Security and Justice team. In his current role, Mr. Russell is responsible for leading a portfolio of work on transportation security 

issues. This includes assessing progress the Federal Government 

has made in effectively allocating and balancing security resources 

across transportation modes while facilitating the legitimate flow of 

commerce and people. 

Since joining GAO in 2002, Mr. Russell has been the recipient of 

several GAO-wide awards, including two Meritorious Service 

Awards and two Results Through Teamwork Awards. Congratulations on your—your awards. 

You are now recognized for 5 minutes for an opening statement. 

STATEMENT OF WILLIAM RUSSELL, ACTING DIRECTOR, 

HOMELAND SECURITY AND JUSTICE TEAM, U.S. GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE 

Mr. RUSSELL. Good morning, Chairman Katko, Ranking Member 

Watson Coleman, and Members of the subcommittee. Thank you 

for the opportunity to testify today on TSA’s PreCheck program 

and airport wait times. My statements are primarily based on our 

February 2018 report. 

Forty-three thousand transportation security officers, TSOs, 

across 440 airports screen 2 million or more passengers and their 

baggage each day. TSA’s primary responsibility is to ensure security, but it also strives to balance safety with the efficient flow of 

passengers through the screening process. 

An inherent challenge in TSA’s mission is taking the time necessary to do the job right and moving passengers through as quickly as possible. With an increasing number of travelers and the busy 

2018 travel season underway, it is critical that TSA get this balance right. 

The TSA standard for wait times is under 30 minutes for standard screening, and under 15 minutes for PreCheck or expedited 

screening. Our review of airport passenger wait time data from 

2015 to 2017 showed that TSA met those standards 99 percent of 

the time. We found that TSA collected data to monitor passenger 

wait times and throughput, and had tools to respond to increases 

when necessary. 

In particular, TSA’s Airport Operations Center, AOC, monitored 

wait times and passenger throughput hourly from 28 airports that 

make up the majority of passenger throughput Nation-wide. Our 

analysis showed the value of TSA collecting and monitoring nearreal-time data. For example, prior to this approach during the 

spring of 2016, we found that long screening queues in excess of 

30 minutes occurred across those 28 busy airports. The AOC was 

created during that period in May 2016 to help address wait time 

issues. 

Since then, each operational hour, wait times are collected at all 

open lanes at the 28 airports and reported hourly to the AOC. The 

15 

1TSOs are screening personnel employed by TSA. In this testimony, references to TSOs do 

not include screening personnel employed by qualified private-sector companies under contract 

with TSA to perform screening operations at the 21 airports participating in TSA’s Screening 

Partnership Program (SPP). See 49 U.S.C. § 44920. TSA oversees the performance of screening 

operations at SPP airports, and the screening personnel at SPP airports must adhere to the 

same screening requirements applicable to TSOs. 

AOC also holds a daily conference call with key stakeholders such 

as airlines and airport officials to help identify challenges. The net 

result is that wait times averaged below 30 minutes at the 28 airports from June 2016 to May 2017. 

To better manage long lines, we found Federal security directors 

at airports noted they can use a number of tools, such as overtime 

and moving TSOs from less busy lanes to congested ones. 

Effective use of expedited screening, or PreCheck, can also impact wait times. Since PreCheck passengers are considered low-risk 

and require less screening, increases in PreCheck enrollment allow 

TSA to screen passengers more quickly. 

Over 2014 and 2015, however, GAO and the DHS OIG reported 

concerns about the security effectiveness with the PreCheck process called Managed Inclusion, in which standard screening passengers are randomly selected for PreCheck. 

In response, in November 2015, TSA modified its risk assessment 

rolls for PreCheck, which reduce the number of passengers automatically designated as low-risk. TSA also significantly reduced its 

use of Managed Inclusion. Currently, TSA only uses Managed Inclusion at airports where passenger screening K–9 teams are available, but has otherwise discontinued it. 

TSA also recently implemented our 2015 recommendation to ensure an effectiveness study for the remaining Managed Inclusion 

process known as K–9 expedited screening followed best practices 

for its design and reliability. 

In conclusion, TSA has taken positive steps to ensure it has 

near-real-time passenger wait time data to quickly identify and address long queues at the security checkpoints, and has taken action 

to improve the security effectiveness of its expedited screening program. But continued attention is needed to these issues in order to 

avoid problems encountered in 2016 and to successfully manage the 

summer travel season. 

Chairman Katko, Ranking Member Watson Coleman, this concludes my prepared statement and I look forward to your questions. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Russell follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF WILLIAM RUSSELL

MAY 17, 2018 

Chairman Katko, Ranking Member Watson Coleman, and Members of the subcommittee: I am pleased to be here today to discuss the Transportation Security Administration’s (TSA) efforts to monitor passenger wait times and the number of passengers that are screened at each airport checkpoint, known as throughput, at airports throughout the United States. As you know, the Department of Homeland Security’s TSA is responsible for protecting the Nation’s transportation systems while 

also ensuring the free movement of people and commerce. TSA employs about 

43,000 Transportation Security Officers (TSOs) who screen over 2 million passengers and their accessible and checked baggage each day at nearly 440 airports 

across the United States.1 In the spring of 2016, unusually long screening checkVerDate Mar 15 2010 12:29 Nov 01, 2018 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 H:\115TH CONGRESS\18TP0517\18TP0517.TXT HEATH
16 

2GAO, Aviation Security: TSA Uses Current Assumptions and Airport-Specific Data for Its 

Staffing Process and Monitors Passenger Wait Times Using Daily Operations Data, GAO–18– 

236 (Washington, DC: Feb. 1, 2018). 3FSDs are TSA officials responsible for overseeing TSA security activities, including passenger and checked baggage screening, at one or more commercial airports. See 49 U.S.C. 

§ 44933. Some FSDs oversee more than one airport within a geographic area; thus, not all FSDs 

are located at the airports they oversee. Airport operators have direct responsibility for implementing security requirements in accordance with their TSA-approved airport security programs. Airport security programs generally cover the day-to-day aviation operations and implement security requirements for which airports are responsible. See generally 49 C.F.R. pt. 1542. 4 According to TSA headquarters officials, TSA identifies the number of TSOs for the Resource 

Allocation Plan based on the number of positions authorized by the agency’s budget, which 

serves as a constraint on the number of TSOs that can be staffed to airports. 5 According to TSA headquarters officials, the agency uses the Resource Allocation Plan to determine how many staff hours are required to adequately staff baggage and passenger screening 

operations at the 21 SPP airports in the United States operated by private-sector companies. 

TSA allocates staff hours to SPP airports based on what TSA anticipates the cost would be to 

maintain a staff of TSOs at those airports. The private companies that operate the SPP airports 

control the hiring, scheduling, and allocation of staff at these airports, although they are required to follow the same TSA standard operating procedures applicable to TSOs and other TSA 

employees. 6 Expedited screening is a process that TSA uses to assess a passenger’s risk to aviation security prior to the passenger arriving at an airport checkpoint. 7TSA’s computer-based staffing model is a proprietary software application that uses simulations to determine each airport’s work requirement based on the airport’s unique operating charpoint lines at certain major U.S. airports raised questions about TSA’s process for 

allocating TSOs to airports and managing passenger wait times. 

My testimony today addresses: (1) How TSA collects and monitors passenger wait 

time and throughput data and (2) tools TSA uses to respond to increases in passenger wait times. This statement is based on selected findings from our February 

2018 report on staffing allocation and managing wait times.2 To perform the work 

from our previous report, we analyzed TSA documentation, reports, and data on 

wait times and passenger throughput from January 2015 through May 2017 for 28 

airports that, according to TSA headquarters officials, represent the majority of passenger throughput Nation-wide or are operationally significant. We also interviewed 

headquarters officials responsible for overseeing TSA’s collection and use of wait 

time and throughput data as well as Federal Security Directors (FSD) and their designees at eight selected airports to determine the tools they use to respond to increases in passenger wait times and throughput.3 Further detail on the scope and 

methodology for the previously-issued report is available within the published product. The work upon which this testimony is based was conducted in accordance with 

generally accepted Government auditing standards. Those standards require that 

we plan and perform the audit to obtain sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide 

a reasonable basis for our findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives. 

We believe that the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for our findings 

and conclusions based on our audit objectives. 

BACKGROUND

TSA Processes for Allocating TSOs Across Airports 

TSA allocates TSOs to airports using its Resource Allocation Plan, which is intended to provide each airport with the optimum number of TSOs needed to screen 

passengers for threats to aviation security, such as prohibited and other potentially 

dangerous items.4 To implement passenger screening and pursue efficient operations, in addition to relying on TSOs, TSA works with officials from airlines and 

airports, as well as officials from associations that represent airlines and airports. 

At airports, FSDs and their designees work with individual airport operators and 

airlines to, among other things, adjust TSA resources (i.e., TSOs and screening assets such as metal detectors) in response to increases in passenger throughput at 

each checkpoint, and monitor passenger wait times at checkpoints. 

At TSA headquarters, the Office of Security Operations (OSO) has primary responsibility for operation of the Resource Allocation Plan and allocation of TSOs 

across airports. To allocate staff to the nearly 440 TSA-regulated airports in the 

United States, OSO is to use a combination of computer-based modeling and lineitem adjustments based on airport-specific information.5 First, the agency is to work 

with a contractor to evaluate the assumptions—such as rates of expedited screening 6—used by the computer-based staffing allocation model to determine the optimal number of TSOs at each airport based on airport size and configuration, flight 

schedules, and the time it takes to perform checkpoint and baggage screening 

tasks.7 Second, after the model has determined how many TSOs are required for 

17 

acteristics, such as layout, equipment, and flight data. The software simulates passenger and 

baggage screening operations to produce required staffing levels. 8GAO, Aviation Security, TSA’s Staffing Allocation Model Is Useful for Allocating Staff Among 

Airports, but Its Assumptions Should Be Systematically Reassessed, GAO–07–299 (Washington, 

DC: Feb. 28, 2007). 9TSA, Operations Directive, OD–400–50–1–5F: Reporting Customer Throughput and Wait 

Times (December 1, 2016). The wait time and throughput reporting requirements also apply to 

the 21 airports participating in TSA’s SPP. 10TSA classifies airports into one of five security risk categories (X, I, II, III, IV) based on 

various factors, such as the total number of takeoffs and landings annually, and other special 

security considerations. In general, Category X airports have the largest number of passenger 

boardings and Category IV airports have the smallest. 

each airport, headquarters-level staff are to make line item adjustments to account 

for factors such as differences in staff availability and training needs that affect 

each airport. 

In 2007, we reviewed the Resource Allocation Plan (referred to as the Staffing Allocation Model at that time) and recommended, among other things, that TSA establish a mechanism to ensure periodic assessment of the assumptions, such as passenger and checked baggage screening rates, underlying the plan. TSA agreed with 

the recommendation, and in December 2007 developed and implemented a plan to 

periodically assess the plan’s assumptions.8

TSA Processes for Collecting Wait Time and Throughput Data at Airports 

At each airport, TSA is to collect throughput data on the number of passengers 

screened under both expedited and standard screening and monitor passenger wait 

times at screening checkpoints. TSA airport officials are to submit passenger 

throughput and wait time data on a daily basis to OSO’s Performance Management 

Division at TSA headquarters, which compiles the data through the Performance 

Measurement Information System, TSA’s web-based data collection system. TSA required FSDs and their designees to collect actual wait times from 2002 through 

2007 and beginning again in July 2014. From 2008 through June 2014, TSA required that FSDs collect data on wait time ranges, such as between 20 to 29 minutes or greater than 30 minutes. 

TSA Information-Sharing Efforts with Stakeholders 

In February 2018, we reported that TSA headquarters officials have taken steps 

intended to improve information sharing with stakeholders—officials from airlines 

and airports, as well as officials from associations that represent airlines and airports—about staffing and related screening procedures at airports. For example, we 

reported that TSA holds daily conference calls with stakeholders at selected airports 

intended to ensure timely communication and to help identify and address challenges in airport operations such as increases in passenger wait times. Additionally, 

we reported that TSA conducted a series of presentations and meetings to discuss 

the Resource Allocation Plan, security enhancements at airports, and airport screening processes, among other things. 

TSA USES PASSENGER WAIT TIME AND THROUGHPUT DATA TO MONITOR AIRPORT

OPERATIONS ON A DAILY BASIS

In February 2018, we reported that TSA collects passenger wait time and 

throughput data and uses those data to monitor daily operations at airports. TSA’s 

Operations Directive (directive), Reporting Customer Throughput and Wait Times, 

provides instructions for collecting and reporting wait time and passenger throughput data for TSA screening lanes.9 Regarding wait time data, according to the directive, FSDs or their designees at all Category X, I, and II airports 10 must measure 

wait times every operational hour in all TSA expedited and standard screening 

lanes. The directive requires wait times to be measured in actual time, using a 

verifiable system such as wait time cards, closed circuit television monitoring, or another confirmable method. The directive indicates that wait times should be measured from the end of the line in which passengers are waiting to the walk-through 

metal detector or advanced imaging technology units. 

According to TSA officials at that time, at the beginning of each hour, wait time 

cards are handed to passengers at the end of the checkpoint line and are collected 

when a passenger reaches the metal detector or imaging unit. Closed-circuit television is monitored from a location other than the checkpoint, such as at the airport’s coordination center. According to TSA headquarters officials, TSA does not require FSDs or their designees to collect wait times from a statistical sample of passengers throughout the hour, but rather requires that one wait time is collected for 

every operational hour in all screening lanes. If more than one wait time is collected 

18 

11 As mentioned above, Category III and IV airports only collect wait time data when they 

estimate the wait times to be longer than 10 minutes, so although the Daily Leadership Report 

will list Category III and IV airports, there may be days when no wait time data are reported 

for these airports. 12When TSA established this center in May 2016, they referred to it as the Incident Command Center. TSA changed the name to the Airport Operations Center in October 2016. 13 In 2007, we reviewed TSA’s Staffing Allocation Model and reported that TSA had a 10- 

minute wait time goal for passenger screening (GAO, Aviation Security: TSA’s Staffing Allocation Model Is Useful for Allocating Staff Among Airports, but Its Assumptions Should Be Systematically Reassessed, GAO–07–299 (Washington, DC: February 28, 2007)). According to TSA headquarters officials we interviewed for our February 2018 report and the TSA administrator’s October 2015 testimony before the House Committee on Homeland Security, Subcommittee on 

Transportation Security, TSA began prioritizing security effectiveness rather than speed in 

2015, in response to concerns regarding security effectiveness following the completion of the 

September 2015 DHS Office of Inspector General Report on covert testing, which used undercover methods to test TSA operations. 

during the hour, the directive indicates that the maximum wait time should be reported. TSA officials at airports we visited for our February 2018 report stated that 

TSOs return completed wait time cards to supervisors, who then enter the information into a shared spreadsheet and eventually into the Performance Measurement 

Information System. Each hour’s reported wait time is then applied to all of a lane’s 

throughput for that given hour. FSDs or their designees at Category III and IV airports may estimate wait times initially, but the directive requires them to measure 

actual wait times when wait times are estimated at 10 minutes or greater. 

The directive also requires FSDs or their designees to collect passenger throughput data directly from the walk-through metal detectors and advanced imaging technology units. According to TSA headquarters officials, the machines have sensors 

that collect the number of passengers who pass through each hour, and TSOs retrieve the data directly from the units. All airports regardless of category are required to enter their wait time and throughput data daily into the information system no later than 3:30 AM Eastern Time of the next calendar day so that the data 

can be included in the morning’s Daily Leadership Report (discussed in more detail 

below). 

To monitor operations for all airports, TSA compiles a daily report utilizing a variety of data points from the information system, including wait time and throughput 

data.11 The Office of Security Operations’ Performance Management Division disseminates the Daily Leadership Report to TSA officials, including regional directors 

and FSDs and their designees every morning detailing the previous day’s wait times 

and throughput figures, among other data points. The Performance Management Division includes a quality assurance addendum with each Daily Leadership Report, 

indicating missing or incorrect data, to include wait time and throughput data, and 

TSA has procedures in place intended to ensure officials at the airports correct the 

data in the Performance Measurement Information System within 2 weeks. 

In addition to the Daily Leadership Report, we reported that TSA utilizes wait 

time and throughput data to monitor airport operations at 28 airports in near-real 

time. In May 2016, TSA established the Airport Operations Center partly in response to the long screening checkpoint lines in the spring of 2016 at certain airports. The center conducts near real-time monitoring of the operations of 28 airports 

that, according to TSA headquarters officials, represent the majority of passenger 

throughput Nation-wide or are operationally significant.12 TSA requires the 28 airports monitored by the center to enter passenger wait time data and throughput 

data hourly (whereas the remaining airports are only required to submit data once 

daily, by 3:30 AM Eastern Time, as described above) so that officials can monitor 

the operations in near-real time. In addition, TSA officials at airports are required 

to report to the center when an event occurs—such as equipment malfunctions, 

weather-related events, or unusually high passenger throughput—that affects airport screening operations and results in wait times that are greater than TSA’s 

standards of 30 minutes in standard screening lanes or greater than 15 minutes in 

expedited screening lanes.13

If an airport is undergoing a period of prolonged wait times, we found that officials at the Airport Operations Center reported coordinating with the Regional Director and the FSD to assist in deploying resources. For example, over the course 

of the summer of 2016, after certain airports experienced long wait times in the 

spring of 2016 as confirmed by our analysis, the center assisted in deploying additional passenger screening canines and TSOs to those airports that experienced 

longer wait times. The center disseminates a morning and evening situational report to TSA airport-level officials and airport stakeholders summarizing Nation-wide 

wait times, highlighting wait times at the top airports and any hot spots (unexVerDate Mar 15 2010 12:29 Nov 01, 2018 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 H:\115TH CONGRESS\18TP0517\18TP0517.TXT HEATH
19 

14 Although the TSA standard for expedited screening is 15 minutes, TSA does not routinely 

report the data this way. For expedited screening, TSA provided wait time data in increments 

of 0–4 minutes; 5–9 minutes; 10–19 minutes; and 20 minutes or more and we analyzed the data 

in these same increments. These are the similar increments that TSA uses to prepare its Daily 

Leadership Report. 15TSA’s National Deployment Force officers support airport screening operations during emergencies, seasonal demands, severe weather conditions, or increased passenger activity requiring 

additional screening personnel above those normally available. 16Passenger screening canine teams consist of a canine trained to detect explosives on passengers and a handler. Airports at which passenger screening canines are used can achieve a 

reduction in passenger wait times through broader use of expedited screening. Passenger screening canines are allocated to airports through a risk-based model, with airports with higher passenger throughput rates, among other factors, receiving more canines. 

pected passenger volume or other operational challenges) that may have occurred 

since the most recent report was issued. In addition to the near-real time monitoring of 28 airports, the center also monitors operations at all other airports and 

disseminates information to airports and stakeholders as needed. 

For our February 2018 report, to determine the extent to which TSA exceeded its 

wait time standards, we analyzed wait time data for the 28 airports monitored by 

the Airport Operations Center for the period of January 2015 through May 2017 for 

both standard and expedited screening. Our analysis showed that TSA met its wait 

time standard of less than 30 minutes in standard screening at the 28 airports 99.3 

percent of the time for the period of January 2015 through May 2017. For expedited 

screening for the same time period at the same airports, we found that 100 percent 

of the time passengers were reported to have waited 19 minutes or less.14

Additionally, our analysis confirmed that the percentage of passengers in standard screening who waited over 30 minutes increased in 2016 during the months of 

March, April, and May as compared to 2015 at all 28 airports. Our analysis also 

confirmed that reported wait times increased in the spring of 2016 at selected airports, as mentioned in the news media. For example, in May 2016, approximately 

22 percent of passengers at Chicago O’Hare International airport and 26 percent of 

passengers at Chicago Midway International airport waited over 30 minutes in 

standard screening as opposed to zero percent for both airports in May 2015, which 

accounted for the longest wait times in the spring of 2016. These two airports were 

part of the 28 airports for which we analyzed wait time data for the period of January 2015 through May 2017. 

TSA AIRPORT OFFICIALS REPORTED USING A VARIETY OF TOOLS TO RESPOND TO

INCREASES IN PASSENGER WAIT TIMES AND THROUGHPUT

In February 2018, we reported that FSDs and their staff at the airports we visited 

identified a variety of tools that they utilize to respond to increases in passenger 

wait times and/or throughput. • TSOs from the National Deployment Force—teams of additional TSOs—are 

available for deployment to airports to support screening operations during 

major events and seasonal increases in passengers.15 For example, TSA officials 

at one airport we visited received National Deployment Force officers during 

busy holiday seasons and officials at another airport received officers during the 

increase in wait times in the spring and summer of 2016. • TSA officials at selected airports used passenger screening canines to expedite 

the screening process and support screening operations during increased passenger throughput and wait time periods.16 For example, TSA officials at one 

airport we visited emphasized the importance of passenger screening canines as 

a useful tool to minimize wait times and meet passenger screening demands at 

times when throughput is high. Officials at another airport we visited relied on 

these canines in busy terminals during peak periods. According to officials at 

two of the airports we visited, the use of passenger screening canines helped 

them to reduce wait times due to increased passenger volumes in the spring 

and summer of 2016. • TSA officials at selected airports also utilize part-time TSOs and overtime hours 

to accommodate increases in passenger throughput and wait times. For example, according to officials at all 8 of the airports we visited, they used overtime 

during peak travel times, such as holiday travel seasons, and officials usually 

planned the use of overtime in advance. Additionally, TSA officials at four of 

the airports we visited told us they used part-time TSOs to help manage peak 

throughput times throughout the day. • According to TSA officials at two of the airports we visited, they moved TSOs 

between checkpoints to accommodate increases in passenger throughput at certain checkpoints and to expedite screening operations. For example, TSA offiVerDate Mar 15 2010 12:29 Nov 01, 2018 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 H:\115TH CONGRESS\18TP0517\18TP0517.TXT HEATH
20 

cials at one airport we visited have a team of TSOs that terminal managers can 

request on short notice. Officials at the other airport estimated that they move 

TSOs between terminals about 40 times per day. 

Chairman Katko, Ranking Member Watson Coleman, and Members of the subcommittee, this concludes my prepared statement. I would be pleased to respond to 

any questions that you may have at this time. 

Mr. KATKO. Mr. Russell, you beat Mr. LaJoye. You guys are on 

a roll today. Thank you very much. I appreciate your—your comments, and look forward to your testimony. 

The Chair now recognizes myself for 5 minutes of questions, and 

I’ll pose this to both of you, because I’d appreciate both of your 

takes on this. I’d like to know—well, a couple things. First of all, 

concerns that I have—and I have articulated these concerns, and 

they are nothing new, but two things: One is the goal has always 

been to get PreCheck around 20 million people, and it really seems 

to have slowed down. We were at 1 million several years ago and 

bumped up pretty quickly, and then it has kind of plateaued off to 

some extent. It seems like it is going a little bit better. 

I know in the Syracuse Airport, once we got a kiosk there, we 

went from a very small percentage on PreCheck to more than 50 

percent of the travelers on PreCheck. So I’d like to hear both your 

of your takes on PreCheck. But I also would like to hear both of 

your takes on PreCheck as a—as a form of what you just mentioned, Mr. Russell, Managed Inclusion, which we made emphatically clear last Congress, that shouldn’t be taking place anymore, 

and it is still taking place at TSA. 

The concerns we had back then about Managed Inclusion was 

that they are not—it is not risk-based security. It is just moving 

people through. Now, we understand—and that is what the genesis 

of this hearing is today—is to have a discussion about, are you 

ready for this crush coming this summer? But as a backdrop to 

that, I don’t want it to be an over-reliance on Managed Inclusiontype practices, which we are going to end by law, because that is 

the only way I think we are going to be able to stop you guys from 

doing it. 

So I—and we are going to set a—we are going to give you a time 

limit in the bill that we get passed that says that after this time, 

no more of this stuff. Because we can’t have it. It is—it is—it is 

a security gap in our minds. We are—and we have asked you many 

times not to, and you still do it. So now we are going to tell you 

by law you can’t. 

So with that being as the backdrop, I would like to hear about 

that, but I would also like to hear about your interactions with respect to industry. So there is a lot in there. So let us hear about 

PreCheck and—and Managed Inclusion, and then let us hear about 

your interactions with industry about anticipating some of the wait 

time issues that might—might materialize this summer. 

Mr. LAJOYE. So Mr. Chairman, one of the things we’re—we’ve acknowledged is that currently we have about 2 out of 10 passengers 

enrolled in PreCheck, and we really think that needs to be closer 

to about 4 out of 10. 

Now, that may seem like a fairly modest goal, but we also understand that, because of the frequency by which—these are business 

travelers and leisure enthusiasts—they represent far and away the 

majority of all the passengers. We still think—we are still conVerDate Mar 15 2010 12:29 Nov 01, 2018 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 H:\115TH CONGRESS\18TP0517\18TP0517.TXT HEATH
21 

vinced there is about 66 percent of these people still aren’t enrolled 

in these. 

We have really focused on a couple of different key areas. The 

first is just the fantastic partnership we have with industry. If you 

get on an airplane today, you are going to see PreCheck marketing 

materials available in in-flight entertainment systems, in in-flight 

magazines, you will see our bookmarks in the seat backs, as well 

as a number of companies that are making this part of the rewards 

programs, for—for banks, and, et cetera, credit card companies. 

Recently, our—our vendor has announced that 50 Staples locations throughout the country, they will have TSA enrollment centers present. 

We also understand that one of the biggest barriers to enrollment is simply going to where the enrollment center is. We have 

350 enrollment centers around the country, 41 of which are in airports. I think that is where the partnership we have with CBP is 

so critically important, in both—at the very senior levels of both 

agencies, we are looking very aggressively at where we can look at 

combining both enrollment centers as well as involve—combining a 

common portal where, you know, somebody can go to one on-line 

system and then sign up for either TSA PreCheck or—or Global 

Entry. 

So we are thinking, in total, these things are going to have a 

positive impact in growing the PreCheck populations. 

Mr. KATKO. If Syracuse can maybe be used as an example, like 

I said, once you put it—and they used to be up in Oswego, which 

is 45 minutes north. You had to drive up on crappy roads just to 

get to the Border Patrol station to sign up for PreCheck. When 

they got it in the airport, it went up to more than 50 percent of 

the passengers. I don’t understand why you don’t just put it at airports. 

Mr. LAJOYE. Again, I think that is—is something that we agree, 

we are looking very closely at. I think both TSA and CBP can realize the efficiencies in this as well as making the process much more 

seamless for the traveling public. That is absolutely something we 

are endeavoring toward. 

Mr. KATKO. OK, and last, just quickly—then I want to hear from 

Mr. Russell. 

What have you done to interact with the private sector to anticipate wait times this summer? 

Mr. LAJOYE. Well—yes. So, I mean, any success we are now having is because of partnerships with the industry. Just the sophistication we see in our models is because we have near-constant 

communication with the airlines, we get their volume forecasts in 

advance of the summer, I was just last week meeting with a number of the associations as well as the airlines. Over the next 2 

weeks, I have got meetings planned with all the major air—air carriers to go over their hub operations, make sure that we absolutely 

have the very best plan, you know, given some of the schedules 

that they are seeing. 

So very intense focus on working directly with both the associations, the airports, and the air carriers. 

Mr. KATKO. Yes, it is critical, because I think—and Memorial 

Day weekend is right around the corner. 

22 

Mr. LAJOYE. Yes, sir. 

Mr. KATKO. I know that because I have about 15 parades that 

weekend. But from your standpoint, it is a high travel time, so I 

have to—I hope you get with them. 

So Mr. Russell, please, your response. 

Mr. RUSSELL. Certainly. Just to pick up on the coordination with 

industry stakeholders—that is one thing we saw in our recent report that—especially the daily conference calls that are held now 

between some of those stakeholders and the airport operations center. It is a chance to surface challenges that may be emerging and 

help to address those as we receive positive feedback, both from the 

FSTs we talk to as well as some of the key industry stakeholders. 

Transitioning to PreCheck, certainly going through the known 

enrollment—or the Known Travelers and increasing the enrollment 

process is—is the key. Those are the Trusted Travelers that have 

had the most vetting, so the closer the TSA can get to that 25 million goal by 2020, the better. 

Mr. KATKO. Is—is that achievable? I mean, the—it would be awesome if they did it, but is that really realistic? 

Mr. RUSSELL. When we last calculated the numbers back in December 2018, it—it—it seemed it was about a—1.9 million applicants or enrollees, and then when you counted the Trusted Traveler groups, that brought it up to about 8.8 million. So that has 

been an on-going challenge, to go from that level up to the—the 25 

million target. 

Mr. KATKO. So what do you think needs to be done? 

Mr. RUSSELL. We haven’t looked specifically at that issue, but— 

but certainly, whatever you can do to make that process easier, and 

to—to vet and encourage the—the groups, like active military, 

DOD civilians, to take advantage of that opportunity, the better. 

Mr. KATKO. What—what—what if at—there are 450 airports Nation-wide. What if the vast majority of airports added kiosks? What 

do you think that would do? 

Mr. RUSSELL. I—I am not sure. We didn’t look specifically at 

that. 

Mr. KATKO. I think that would blow the lid off it. I think—yes, 

I think you would get a lot more people signing up. It is pretty simple to me. 

All right. Anything else, sir? 

Mr. RUSSELL. Just one thing on the Managed Inclusion. That is 

something—in our past work, we have had concerns as well. Our 

understanding now is that has been limited to passenger screening 

K–9 teams. In our most recent work, the FSTs pointed that that 

was a very effective way to help manage the queues. Our recommendation along those lines was basically to do a study to look 

at the security effectiveness of that process, and our understanding 

is TSA has done that. 

Mr. KATKO. You know, I fully believe in the—the K–9 process, 

and Mr. Rogers told me I had to, but—— 

[Laughter.] 

Mr. KATKO. No, but I fully believe in it, but I do think that when 

you pay for a service and that service is based on risk-based security, that people shouldn’t be coming into that and—you know, violating that service area, because first of all, it is not right. Second 

23 

of all, far more importantly, from a security standpoint, we are diminishing our security. 

So the K–9s serve a great role, but they—you know, they should 

not replace PreCheck, because a K–9 can’t go back and do a background check on you. They can make sure you are not carrying 

something you shouldn’t, but we all know there are diversified 

threats now. 

So have—the whole basis of PreCheck is risk-based security and 

known—knowing the person before the get—get to the—step foot 

at the airport. That is the whole idea of it. We are violating that— 

that whole notion when we just let people go through PreCheck 

lanes under any circumstances, so it has got to end. I—I have— 

pretty sure I have made myself clear on that. 

The Chair now recognize the Ranking Member, Ms. Watson Coleman, for 5 minutes of questioning. 

Ms. WATSON COLEMAN. Thank you very much. I have three lines 

of questions, actually all addressed to TSA specifically. I am going 

to try to get through them as quickly as possible, so I am going to 

ask you if you could respond as concisely as possible. 

The first one is in—in 2016—this has to do with increasing the 

number of people who are enrolled in PreCheck. In 2016, TSA 

withdrew a solicitation for in—for the industry to propose new 

ways to enroll passengers in PreCheck, citing cybersecurity concerns. Now I heard what you said about some of the increased activity that you have had with industry, but I would like to know, 

does TSA plan to issue a new solicitation specifically on this issue? 

If so, when? How does TSA plan to increase enrollments and participation in PreCheck? 

Mr. LAJOYE. So, ma’am, with respect to the RFP, we did cancel 

the TSA expansion RFP back in—citing the concerns, as you—as 

you pointed out. That has been replaced by the UES, which is our 

universal enrollment system. 

Ms. WATSON COLEMAN. Your universal who? 

Mr. LAJOYE. Universal—universal enrollment system. So it 

would be—it would be across all of our vetting, with TSA 

PreCheck, Hazard—you know, HME, as well as TWIC. That solicitation period is over. We are in sort-of the evaluating these things, 

and we hope to award this this fall. 

Ms. WATSON COLEMAN. OK. You have any idea when you all are 

going to be making a decision as to where to go on this? 

Mr. LAJOYE. This fall, ma’am. 

Ms. WATSON COLEMAN. This fall. I am sorry, I didn’t hear you. 

OK, thank you. 

So taking you back to the New York Times article about the 

spokes—this—some—some kind of checklist, that you, or watch 

list—secret watch list that you all are supposed to have. Could you 

please tell me more about the list, including how many people are 

currently on it and what security purpose that it serves? Can you 

please provide me with the—with the directive that initiated it, 

and any official communications regarding such a list? Does TSA 

maintain any other watch lists? So that is, like, three quick questions. 

24 

Mr. LAJOYE. Yes, ma’am. It is, we will provide back for the 

record the actual directives themselves, as they are, you know, sensitive security information. 

Ms. WATSON COLEMAN. The directives? 

Mr. LAJOYE. Yes, ma’am. 

Ms. WATSON COLEMAN. OK. 

Mr. LAJOYE. There are less than 50 people on this list, and the 

intent was—we were seeing an alarming increase in the number of 

assaults against our officers. So this is—there is no additional 

screening being applied to these individuals, it simply a means to 

communicate that a passenger may be arriving at the airport, and 

they have either demonstrated a history of assaulting officers or in 

trying to circumvent some sort of security procedure. 

So no additional screening, but it does give the local Federal security directors a heads-up that somebody transiting the airport 

has demonstrated a history of—of—— 

Ms. WATSON COLEMAN. OK. 

Mr. LAJOYE. Unsafe or—you know, behavior that would have us 

concerned. 

Ms. WATSON COLEMAN. All right, so I will look forward to the 

kind of directive which—— 

Mr. LAJOYE. Yes, ma’am. 

Ms. WATSON COLEMAN. Would help me understand. But did—are 

there any other such secret wait lists that—watch lists that you all 

have? 

Mr. LAJOYE. Again, outside of the general list that we have with 

respect to somebody who would be on a no-fly list, but—but, no—— 

Ms. WATSON COLEMAN. OK. 

Mr. LAJOYE. Again, this—this list is not about the—this is different, because it is a—this applies no additional screening to this 

individual, it is simply an awareness that—that somebody is going 

through the checkpoint that has demonstrated concerning—you 

know, assaultive behavior in the past to our officers. 

Ms. WATSON COLEMAN. So it is like you are prepared. 

Mr. LAJOYE. Yes, ma’am. 

Ms. WATSON COLEMAN. OK. I am—I am really interested in what 

resources that you don’t have that you may need. Particularly, do 

you think that there is a need for additional officers to be able to 

respond to what is going to be this spike in travel? If so, how 

many? Well, let us deal with that first. 

Mr. LAJOYE. Well, ma’am, I think our level of sophistication in 

the model as has been described has allowed us to really leverage 

resources that we have. So this summer, we really measure the 

peak from mid-July to mid-July. So if you back from our peak from 

last summer, we have fully 1,600 to 1,800 more TSOs than we did 

just last summer, in addition to 50 more passenger-screening K– 

9s. 

We have increased overtime use by almost 5 percent, so we really 

think that we are in the best position we have ever been in response to what is to be a 4 percent growth from last year. 

Ms. WATSON COLEMAN. So then you don’t think that there is any 

lack of human personnel that you need—— 

Mr. LAJOYE. No—— 

Ms. WATSON COLEMAN. In addition to what you already have? 

25 

Mr. LAJOYE. No, ma’am, I honestly think that, you know, given 

what we put in place for the summer and the partnership with the 

airlines and airports that we are as prepared as we have ever been 

to meet the demands. If you go back to our spring break, the last 

holiday season, in addition to last summer, we have really, you 

know, limited any sort of impact to the airports. 

Ms. WATSON COLEMAN. So, kind-of last question with regard to 

this. How is your retention rate with—with officers? How is the 

morale, and what is being done to sort-of deal with the fact that 

these individuals are sort-of outside of the mainstream of how they 

can move through the system and move up? Are we doing anything 

about it? 

Mr. LAJOYE. Well, thank you for that question. Again, the morale 

of our work force is something that the administrator, all the leadership at TSA pay, you know, very close attention to. Having been 

out there in the field, I understand full well, you know, the importance of the job that they do. 

So there is a number of things that—that we put in place. You 

know, having heard from the work force, there is a lot of stress in 

how they were getting their annual tests. It was sort-of—it was in 

a room that was wholly different than what their day-to-day experiences are, and so the administrator has put change—wholesale 

changes to the annual testing for officers. Much more realistic. 

Their direct leadership chain is absolutely involved in this process 

now. 

In addition, the administrator has laid out a plan, because our 

officers are being asked to operate exceedingly advanced technology, in addition to going down to a Federal law enforcement 

training center to receive a lot of additional training, and as our 

officers are acquiring this new training, he wants to be able to tie 

the award money to getting those additional skills. 

Last, what we also know from our officers is that they want to 

have confidence that they have the very best technology out there 

to do their job. Which is why, you know, the support from the committee as well as the administrator in getting computer tomography out there, advance screening lanes; you know, those are all 

important things that give our work force confidence, and I think 

improve morale. 

Ms. WATSON COLEMAN. Absolutely, and it is also important that 

they are being paid fair wages, that they have access to benefits 

and pensions and moving up, and that they have a system that allows them to express their concerns and have it dealt with. So you 

are—you are all moving in a right direction, got a lot more to do. 

Thank you. I yield back. 

Mr. KATKO. Thank you, Mrs. Watson Coleman. The now—the 

Chair now recognizes the gentleman from Alabama, Mr. Rogers, for 

5 minutes of questioning. Mr. Rogers. 

Mr. ROGERS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you all for being 

here. I wanted to ask—you talked about have 50 more K–9 teams 

this July than you had last July. How many do you need? 

Mr. LAJOYE. Again, right now we are authorized 372. We have 

seen about a 180 percent increase in the program over the next 

couple of years, so we have really been doubling down on our efforts in—in Lackland to make sure we have adequate training and 

26 

kennel space. It is one of the things we are looking very closely at 

as we start getting new technology, number of officers, how we balance that against the—the K–9. That will be an important part of 

what our future budget submissions look like. 

Mr. ROGERS. Do you have enough to cover the category airports? 

Mr. LAJOYE. Yes, sir. 

Mr. ROGERS. OK. What is next, as far as your expansion of that 

capability? 

Mr. LAJOYE. Well, I think right now, sir, I—one of the areas we 

are focusing on is there is third-party K–9 for use in the cargo operations, and so we think that shows a lot of promise for—we have 

been working very closely with industry with that, and again, looking at the precision of our model to how we incorporate how K–9s 

can fold into that I think is really, really important. 

So from my perspective, the next evolution of how we sort-of staff 

airports needs to include how we are utilizing K–9s so that we can 

really sit down and make sure we are projecting an adequate number of K–9s for future budget years. 

Mr. ROGERS. Well, I saw a fiscal year 2019 budget here saying 

that it supports 1,047 K–9 teams, but that includes State and 

locals, which make up two-thirds of that. Tell me how you use the 

State and local teams. 

Mr. LAJOYE. Well, they are—they are critically important to us. 

I mean, I—as you pointed out correctly, I mean fully two-thirds of 

those teams are from our State and local partners. 

Mr. ROGERS. Well they—are they explosive detection K–9s? 

Mr. LAJOYE. Yes, sir. 

Mr. ROGERS. Are they trained through the Lackland program or 

a similar program? 

Mr. LAJOYE. Those are all TSA dogs, sir. So yes, they really provide a lot of this, you know, public area, you know, patrolling, unattended bags in airports. We work very closely—issues in cargo 

warehouses. We really rely heavily on our State and local partners 

with the use of the K–9s to mitigate some of the public areas of 

the airports. 

Mr. ROGERS. When—do—have you all made a determination as 

to when you will achieve the threshold of K–9 teams that you feel 

are adequate to meet the National needs? 

Mr. LAJOYE. I think this—— 

Mr. ROGERS. What is that number? 

Mr. LAJOYE. I still think that is something we are looking at, sir. 

I—I—again, that is really the next evolution of where I think we 

take our staffing and scheduling models, is that—you know, we are 

still fairly new to the passenger screening business, as you pointed 

out, about one-third of the teams are in use in passenger screening. 

So as we mature our model, we really have to understand with 

new technology how many dogs we think we really, really need to 

manage the airports. 

Mr. ROGERS. Describe for me exactly what K–9 expedited screening is. Is that Managed Inclusion? 

Mr. LAJOYE. No, sir. 

Mr. ROGERS. How—how does it differ? 

Mr. LAJOYE. You know, as described earlier, the Managed Inclusion II that was in use, you know, several years ago involved the 

27 

use of the BDOs, and it was very correctly pointed out a randomized—— 

Our use of the dogs is enhanced screening. Again, we believe 

very well that the dogs are very effective and—as a deterrent, as 

well as for sniffing for explosives. So we—we are very confident 

that when the dogs are in use, that substantially mitigated many 

of the concerns that we have, and we feel that we can afford those 

passengers, all of whom have been screened for explosives, a more 

expedited process of going through the checkpoint. 

However, we view dogs as an additional layer of security, not a 

replacement for anything. 

Mr. ROGERS. Well—well—I want to ask you—you said ‘‘those passengers.’’ You mean those passengers who are not PreCheck or in 

another Trusted Traveler Program? 

Mr. LAJOYE. The passengers that are screened by the K–9s, sir. 

Mr. ROGERS. Are not part of the Trusted Traveler system? 

Mr. LAJOYE. So I guess it would be any—any—right now, we use 

the K–9s to screen any passengers going through the checkpoint. 

That may in fact be folks that are already involved in TSA Trusted 

Traveler Programs, or standard passengers who have not been enrolled. We believe, again, that we may see a dog either screening 

passengers who are enrolled or passengers who are not, because we 

view them as an additional layer of security, not a replacement. 

Mr. ROGERS. Yes. Yes, and that is the thing that—that I think 

we were concerned about coming in today is—is we had the perception that you all may have decide—developed a new category where 

you were going to just use the K–9s as the primary layer, and they 

should just be one of several layers that you have employed to 

make sure that these folks that don’t need to be putting bad things 

on airplanes are able to do it. 

Mr. LAJOYE. Yes, sir, and we agree. 

Mr. ROGERS. Let me ask this, Mr. Russell. You made the point— 

you said K–9 expedited screening does meet best practices standard. Is that accurate? 

Mr. RUSSELL. The design of the study that they did to determine 

the effectiveness of that approach. 

Mr. ROGERS. You felt like that does—that was designed—— 

Mr. RUSSELL. Right. 

Mr. ROGERS. To be an effective way—— 

Mr. RUSSELL. We had concerns initially that—— 

Mr. ROGERS. That they could measure, I guess. 

Mr. RUSSELL. That it wasn’t going to align with things like randomizing the airports selected and sort-of the scope of the review. 

TSA took action to—to make sure that the study they did conduct 

met the—that sort of criteria. 

Mr. ROGERS. I see, I see. Last question I had was—Mr. LaJoye, 

you said about 66 percent of the people that you believe should be 

enrolled in PreCheck are not. Did I understand that you think the 

reason why is because it is just inconvenient for them to find a location to—to sign up? 

Mr. LAJOYE. That is what—— 

Mr. ROGERS. Not the $100 fee, it is just inconvenience? 

Mr. LAJOYE. The $80—$85 fee, sir. I—we really honestly think 

that the biggest barrier to an existing enrollment process: Finding 

28 

a place to go enroll. That is what some of our market research 

says. We really think there are still lots of opportunities, even for 

those folks who fly 5 to 15 times a year, which really meets for that 

target passenger segmentation, we really think there is still a lot 

of room for us to target those people for full-time enrollment. 

Mr. ROGERS. Yes, I agree. I—when I entered Global Entry, when 

I—to go into the interview part, you know, I had to go to the Atlanta Airport, to the farthest terminal. It was very inconvenient to 

do that. I do think that more people would go in to that, which 

would get them into PreCheck, if we could find a way to make 

those interviews more convenient. Because all the questions are 

done on-line. 

Mr. LAJOYE. Yes, sir, and in fact, one of the things we are—we 

are coming up on the 5-year period for folks who signed up for 

PreCheck very early on, and so we are putting forth a plan for 

those passengers to do so on-line, without having to go back to an 

enrollment center. We also think that is important, in keeping people that are enrolled—keeping them enrolled. 

Mr. ROGERS. Right, right. 

Mr. LAJOYE. Again, pointing back to the really, really critical 

work we are doing with CBP, because it—we all agree that if we 

can merge programs at enrollment sites and an on-line portal, we 

really think that is going to have a positive impact on the passenger and a positive impact on the overall growth of all DHS 

Trusted Traveler programs. 

Mr. ROGERS. Great. Well, thank you. I yield back. 

Mr. LAJOYE. Yes, sir. 

Mr. KATKO. Well, thank you, Mr. Rogers. Before we go to the 

next question, I just want to note that former Secretary of Homeland Security Mr. Johnson is here today, and we saw him walk in, 

so welcome. It is very strange not to see you at the witness table, 

so—— 

I—I imagine that is the case, so welcome. I will make just one 

quick observation that I made—two—two observations. One is if it 

is a question of convenience, put the kiosks at the airports. This— 

for PreCheck. 

The second thing is that, without betraying Classified information, we know that there are some materials of a non-explosive nature that are considered lethal threat now that we have to account 

for, and—and I am not sure the K–9s were going to be trained on 

that. If they—they have to be trained on that, if that is the case, 

so we have to keep that in mind as well. That is yet another reason 

why only PreCheck should be PreCheck. 

With that, I would like to welcome Mr. Estes from Kansas for 5 

minutes of questions. I am sorry, Mr. Keating for 5 minutes of 

questions, excuse me, from Massachusetts. 

Mr. KEATING. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. It is great to see you 

here, Mr. Secretary, again. Mr. LaJoye, thank you. As a Celtics 

fan, it is always great to have—gives me a great feeling that anyone named Bill Russell is in front of us, so thank you, Mr. Russell, 

as well. 

Now this is just a quick—couple of quick follow-ups. That list you 

have—it was the 95 list, I guess it was called in the Times, or it 

is under 50 people—there is no reason any employee should ever 

29 

have to put up with assault, particularly in such a stressful job, 

and it gives me a—a time to comment on how great my experience 

has been seeing those people work under tough conditions. 

But I want to just—those 50 people—or, under 50 people, do they 

know they are on this list? 

Mr. LAJOYE. I am not sure if they do or not, sir. But again, any 

passenger would have the right to go back through DHS TRIP if 

they want to ask—— 

Mr. KEATING. But—but they don’t know they are on the list. So 

I would think it would be effective if these people, as a deterrent, 

knew they were on the list. I think—I think you should—should, 

you know, look into that. 

Mr. LAJOYE. Yes, sir. 

Mr. KEATING. Because if you are going to—you know, affect behavior, it would be great that they knew they were on the list, and 

it would be great if they are on the list, they—if they had a way 

to appeal that in case there is a subjective determination, if someone is hanging—I hang around the—the security lines before I 

jump in sometimes, too. I tend to walk in circles on the phone. So 

I don’t know. I don’t want to end up on a list either, so. 

Mr. LAJOYE. If I could, sir, I would—that is really not the—what 

the intent of the program is for. It is not for somebody who—these 

are people that have demonstrated in the past their willingness to 

attempt to bypass—— 

Mr. KEATING. OK, I understand, I just want to get onto another 

question, but—— 

Mr. LAJOYE. Yes, sir. 

Mr. KEATING. The—the good thing is, I think, if they know they 

are on the list, you might affect behavior better. 

Mr. LAJOYE. Yes, sir. 

Mr. KEATING. In the future. The best thing to do for employees 

is not to have them subject to it at all. So, that is the thing. 

I am curious, too—on—on the subject of another list. The—I am 

on Counterterrorism and Ranking on Terrorism and Foreign Affairs, but—how are you doing with the FBI no-fly list? How is that 

functioning? Any problems with that lately? 

Mr. LAJOYE. No, sir. 

Mr. KEATING. So no mistakes, no—because you would be on 

the—you would know, you are on the receiving end of this. 

Mr. LAJOYE. Yes, from my perspective it is working quite well, 

sir. 

Mr. KEATING. Good. Good to know that, when we have gun issues 

that are in front of us about people that can get explosives legally 

or a gun legally, and they are on the terrorist watch list that you 

say now is running so well, it is great to know, because the criticism for those people that oppose that are saying, wow, it is a 

mess. It is not functioning well, so we have to be careful of their 

rights. 

I am glad to hear it from your account. You said it in your testimony, Mr. LaJoye, that some of the revenues will help address the 

shortfalls. I just want to make sure—you said they are help, but 

if we could—that implies that if you had more resources, you could 

do a little better, this summer in particular when things spike. 

Any—— 

30 

Mr. LAJOYE. Well, sir, what I—— 

Mr. KEATING. I just want to qualify your words. 

Mr. LAJOYE. Yes, what is—what I would point out is one of the 

things that we are very aware of is that at about 45 percent of the 

largest airports, they have one or more checkpoints that are capacity constrained. So there are a number of places where, even if we 

had more officers, it is not likely to mitigate sort of any wait time 

issues, which is why the work we are doing with the airports is so 

important. 

So as—as they are expanding the airports, we are monitoring 

things very, very closely. But for—for this summer, with fully 1,600 

more officers than last summer, well I—I really do honestly feel 

that we are in the best position to meet the summer demand. 

Mr. KEATING. Yes. We had a meeting with some of the airline industry, I think last year, too. One of the things that is difficult— 

that makes your job difficult is the configuration of the airports 

themselves. They are different. Anything that can be done to help 

along those lines, or anything we could do—this is a good chance 

for you to reach out for some help from us. 

Mr. LAJOYE. I will give a lot of the—the airports a lot of credit. 

They are wholly involved. I—I know of virtually no airport that is 

not in the middle of major construction to make sure that they are, 

in fact, adding capacity. A number of the airports and airlines, you 

know, especially for the summer, are getting their employees out 

there to make sure they are communicating with passengers if 

there has been a change. 

So—and that is also—I think shows the sophistication of our 

model, because one of the things we now do is making sure at the 

design phase we are meeting with airports early on to know that 

in 3 years, in 2 years, if they are planning for additional lanes, we 

make sure we can account for those things in some of our future 

budget submissions. 

So great work, great partnership with the airports themselves on 

this. 

Mr. KEATING. OK, I will—I will follow up with some written 

questions. 

Mr. LAJOYE. Yes, sir. 

Mr. KEATING. But I do thank you for your work. It is a tough job, 

and the people that work for you I think do very well, and it should 

be said from time to time. 

I yield back. 

Mr. KATKO. Thank you, Mr. Keating. The Chair now recognizes 

Mr. Estes from Kansas for 5 minutes of questions. 

Mr. ESTES. Thank you, Chairman. We have talked about TSA 

PreCheck enrollment, and I would agree that part of the delay in 

people signing up is because of the inconvenience of going to the 

location. 

Using myself as an example, I was one of those travelers who 

was probably traveling five times a year before I came into this 

role a year ago. At that point in time, the other motivating factor 

in addition to the inconvenience of having to go to the location to 

sign up for—for TSA PreCheck was roughly half the time when I 

went to the airport for one of those five flights I was automatically 

put into TSA PreCheck. 

31 

I think that is also one of those factors that is really leading to 

a slow decline in the—or a—not a growth in the number of people 

that are enrolled. I know we have talked about it here, multiple 

times about that, and I just wanted to emphasize that that is something we need to—we need to keep pushing. 

Because I think that is if not as important, it is also a mitigating 

factor, and I don’t know if that is part of what you are looking at 

as well. That is kind of why we are pushing for—to eliminate that 

practice. 

Mr. LAJOYE. It is, and it is something that we agree. This is 

more of a natural evolution of what PreCheck looks like. I remember well the experience from 2016. So, I think it is important that 

we sort-of balance the capacity constraints of the airports, the 

growth of the TSA Trusted Traveler Programs, in addition to what 

that staffing looks like. 

But I do agree that it is something we have to very, very closely 

consider, given what we are facing in the world today. We really 

don’t want to, you know, result in large crowds of people being in 

front of the airport, but I agree, fully. I understand the committee’s 

concern with this. It is something we are very much focused on trying to improve. 

Mr. ESTES. OK. Let me ask another question and we have talked 

about this already, to some degree. Just as we enter into the peak 

summer travel season and talked about some of the things we 

wanted to do. But I just wanted to see if, maybe, you could recap 

what the activities that you are expecting to do that would help 

mitigate that? To make sure that that is—that is the plan you 

have. 

Mr. LAJOYE. So, compared to last summer, sir, we have increased 

overtime by 5 percent, across the board. We fully have between 

1,400 and 1,600 additional officers than we did last summer. In addition to 50 more passenger screening K–9s. 

One of the other things that we have done, I think, to go back 

to show—demonstrate the maturity of our modeling is, the Federal 

security directors themselves, having been one, this is very close to 

me, they have much more flexibility in how they utilize their own 

resources. They can decide at what rate they want to have parttime versus full-time. They can decide at what rate that they want 

to increase their overtime within their budgets. 

There are a number of airports that we also know we have a difficult time competing, this would attract new talent. So, in some 

of these airports, we have increased—we have put our human capital folks in place for rapid hiring. We are on-boarding double what 

we were. We are on-boarding almost 600 additional officers a pay 

period. 

Then there are some places where we are really having to fulltime. We have offered some temporary incentives to attract people 

to come work for TSA. So, it has really been a concerted effort over 

many—many months to make sure that everybody—all the leadership at TSA is focused on supporting those front lines, in addition 

to the great partnership we have been having with the airports and 

the airlines. 

Mr. ESTES. So, I guess my only comment that I would add to that 

is, what I have seen over the last few months, the wait times are 

32 

relatively fine in most of the airports that I have—I have flown 

through. But my concern is, as we increase the peak travel 

amounts, that we are going to run into problems with that. So I 

wanted to make sure that those activities got engaged and done in 

time for us to use this summer. 

Mr. LAJOYE. Yes, sir. 

Mr. ESTES. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back. 

Mr. KATKO. Thank you, Mr. Estes. The Chair now recognizes, 

Mr. Rogers for some follow-up questions, Mr. Rogers from Alabama. 

Mr. ROGERS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I just wanted to try to 

be clear, I am still not clear on the K–9 expedited screening and 

its application. My understanding was that you were using it for 

people who were not in PreCheck, that you needed to move a little 

faster, but they were going through the standard screening, but in 

kind-of an expedited lane, as long as K–9s were added as a layer 

to that lane. Is that not what it is? 

Mr. LAJOYE. It is that, sir. So, it is to—again, any passenger, 

today—any passenger going through the checkpoint could be subject to a passenger screening K–9. That could be somebody—we 

could have a K–9 being used to screen passengers that are already 

enrolled in TSA PreCheck because, in our view, it is an additional—— 

Mr. ROGERS. I argue it should be. I think that everybody should 

be. 

Mr. LAJOYE. Yes, sir. 

Mr. ROGERS. But how does this get the term expedited? How 

does that become applicable? If you are—assuming you are not a 

PreCheck traveler, my understanding is that is what you are trying 

to expedite, is the people who are not PreCheck passengers. 

Mr. LAJOYE. I think that is fair, sir. So there are a number of 

ways you could go through an airport in an expedited manner. You 

could be, you now, somebody who is enrolled in a Trusted Traveler 

population and you are going through a dedicated PreCheck lane. 

In addition, on the standard lanes, any passenger with whom they 

have gone past the dogs and we know they have been screened for 

explosives, they go through the checkpoint at a similar configuration what a PreCheck lane would be. 

So that is really how we—— 

Mr. ROGERS. That is—OK. I am with you now. Thank you. I just 

wasn’t clear. 

Mr. LAJOYE. That is all right. It was probably me, sir. 

Mr. ROGERS. Thanks. 

Mr. KATKO. Thank you, Mr. Rogers. I just want to make sure I 

am clear on the follow-up question now. I was in Fort Meyers and 

the line was very long. The K–9s were there. They were putting everybody through the PreCheck line. 

The lane was, said PreCheck. Everybody was going through a 

PreCheck lane. So I am not sure that is uniform throughout the 

country. Then I am sure that may not be intent. But it is pretty 

clear to me that there is—people that are not in PreCheck that are 

going into PreCheck, once they go by a K–9, is that correct? 

Mr. LAJOYE. That is correct, sir. 

Mr. KATKO. OK, all right. Thank you very much. 

33 

I appreciate both of your testimonies. I would encourage you to 

stay for the second panel, just so you can hear what they have to 

say about their concerns about wait times this summer. But I do 

appreciate everything you are doing. You have a very difficult job 

and I commend you for doing it. 

I also would be remiss if I didn’t commend—a shout-out to all the 

officers on the front lines throughout the country, who do a very 

difficult job and they don’t get paid a ton of money. 

There is an awful lot of pride that I see, especially when I go 

through Syracuse in the airports and get to know the people. The 

level of professionalism is pretty substantial. So you should all be 

congratulated for that. 

They are doing—they are trying to find the needle in the haystack every minute of every day. 

Like I told my scheduler, you notice you are doing—you only notice what is going on if you do something wrong, as a scheduler. 

It is the same thing with the—with the front lines there. I mean, 

you won’t know it unless you are doing something wrong—unless 

something, a tragedy strikes. 

That is a pretty stressful situation for them. They do a wonderful 

job and they should be commended for that. So thank you very 

much. Thank you both for your professionalism today. I hope you 

stick around for the second panel. 

We will take a brief adjournment. Thank you very much. 

Mr. LAJOYE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. KATKO. Thank you. 

[Recess.] 

Mr. KATKO. OK, we are back on the record. I would like to welcome our second panel today for today’s hearing. Our first witness 

is Ms. Lorraine Howerton, the senior director of government relations for the U.S. Travel Association. In this position she is responsible for outreach to advance U.S. travels legislative priorities in 

Congress, and for representing the organization on the Aviation Security Advisory Committee which has really turned into a really 

wonderful organization doing a lot of good work. 

Previously Ms. Howerton served as vice president for legislative 

affairs for the Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association where she 

spearheaded the creation of the Congressional General Aviation 

Caucus. Ms. Howerton is now recognized for 5 minutes for an opening statement. 

STATEMENT OF LORRAINE HOWERTON, SENIOR DIRECTOR OF 

GOVERNMENT RELATIONS, U.S. TRAVEL ASSOCIATION 

Ms. HOWERTON. Good morning, Chairman Katko and Members of 

the committee. Is this better? Much better. Good morning, Chairman Katko and Members of the committee. It is my pleasure to 

offer testimony for you this morning. 

Thank you for the opportunity to allow me to testify on behalf 

of the U.S. Travel Association. U.S. Travel is the National nonprofit organization representing more than 1,200 member organizations across all sectors of the travel industry that generates $2.4 

trillion in economic output, and supports 15.6 million American 

jobs. 

34 

TSA PreCheck has been a major breakthrough in providing optimum security and improving the travel experience. Today 

PreCheck is an established program that is available at more than 

200 airports with 52 participating airlines. 

Yet, enrollment is stagnant. Approximately 6 million people are 

enrolled and another 2 million have PreCheck as a result of Global 

Entry. Efforts to continue the program’s expansion should be a priority for TSA and its expansion should focus on four areas which 

we refer to as the four Ps: Process, promotion, price, and 

prioritization. We urge the Trump administration and Congress to 

place a renewed focus on refining and enhancing the program to increase participation, particularly making enrollment more convenient without sacrificing security. 

U.S. Travel offers the following recommendations that would further improve PreCheck, protect travel or privacy, and give the 

American people the best return on their investments of traveler 

fees. 

We recommend that TSA analyze and develop a process for spontaneous enrollment. Too often, the current requirement for two 

forms of identification is a significant barrier to travelers enrolling 

in the program and a modification to only one document would 

make it easier for people to spontaneously enroll. A Real ID driver’s license is an example how one document can serve the security 

purposes for enrolling in PreCheck. 

We also recommend offering volume discounts and financial incentive or a cost break to large companies to help spark more volume enrollments. 

The up-front cost of an $85 enrollment fee multiplied by thousands of employees is a measurable and significant cost with harder-to-measure returns. Providing quantity discounts to corporate 

travel managers, especially those who supply applicants to TSA for 

on-site enrollment, may create more corporate interest. 

Helping families also is warranted. We encourage TSA and its 

partners at OMB to reconsider the rule for children and explore a 

subscription model for fees that would be paid on an annual basis, 

not 5 years at a time. 

While younger children 12 and under are allowed a parent in 

PreCheck, older children cannot. The one-time cost of enrolling a 

family of five may be a significant factor for many families and 

deter enrollment. 

As it relates to checkpoint efficiency and as we head into one of 

the heaviest travel seasons, we know it is extremely important not 

to have long wait times, and we know that TSA mitigates the ebb 

and flow of peak travel by deploying various techniques to safely 

move people. 

One of the techniques is Managed Inclusion, or as we heard 

today, Enhanced Inclusion in the PreCheck lanes. Blending of populations confuses the traveling public, aggravates PreCheck customers, and diminishes the value of the program to both the Government and the traveler. 

We understand that Managed Inclusion is being phased out. 

However, phasing out Managed Inclusion without phasing in other 

strategies and screening techniques to maintain efficiency will only 

lead to longer lines and new frustrations. We hope TSA develops 

35 

a plan to solve the problem rather than opting to trade one set of 

problems for a different set. 

Another recommendation we make is for Congress to help TSA 

get rid of the road blocks in expanding the number of third-party 

prescreening companies. Currently there is one company. Having 

multiple companies will drive competition, reduce costs, and help 

grow enrollment. 

Last, I would be remiss if I did not remind this good committee 

that one-third of airline passenger fees collected are being diverted 

from TSA aviation security screening to the general fund until 

2025. 

Comparing 2013 to 2017, travelers paid $2 billion more in fees; $3.9 billion versus 1.9 billion, for the exact same service. Revenue 

raised from aviation security fees should go toward securing travelers, not to deficit reduction. We support solutions to repeal the 

current diversion. 

This concludes my statement and I would look forward to answering any questions. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Howerton follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF LORRAINE HOWERTON

MAY 17, 2018 

Chairman Katko and Ranking Member Watson Coleman I am pleased to testify 

today on behalf of the U.S. Travel Association on ‘‘Assessing the TSA Checkpoint: 

The PreCheck Program and Airport Wait Times’’. 

The U.S. Travel Association (U.S. Travel) is the National, non-profit organization 

representing more than 1,200 member organizations across all sectors of the travel 

industry that generates $2.4 trillion in economic output and supports 15.6 million 

American jobs. 

Last week, the U.S. travel community celebrated National Travel and Tourism 

Week (NTTW), an annual tradition for the U.S. travel community. It’s a time when 

travel and tourism professionals across the country unite to celebrate the value 

travel holds for our economy, businesses, and personal well-being. This year’s celebration marked the 35th anniversary of the 1983 Congressional resolution that established NTTW. We were excited to recognize the enduring ethos of the travel industry: Welcoming travelers from all over the world to experience what makes this 

country the best place to visit. 

As demonstrated last week, the travel and tourism industry celebrates the value 

of travel, but we also recognize the need for security. U.S. Travel believes that security and efficiency are not mutually exclusive. Rather, they are equally important 

and equally achievable objectives. In particular, the Transportation and Security 

Administration (TSA) PreCheck® has been a major breakthrough in improving the 

travel experience. In October 2011, TSA launched PreCheck® as a pilot program, 

which was first available at four airports—Atlanta, Dallas, Detroit, and Miami. 

Today, TSA PreCheck® is an established program that is available at more than 

200 airports with 52 participating airlines. The program is rightly hailed as one of 

the best innovations by the Federal Government in recent years, and has led to an 

improved relationship between the traveling public and the agency. 

BACKGROUND

U.S. Travel has long been concerned that an inefficient, inconsistent, and occasionally invasive screening process would deter legitimate travelers from traveling. 

Thus, in 2011, the Association concluded a year-long expert-led project to formulate 

recommendations for travel-enhancing changes to the goals and performance of 

TSA. Led by former Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Tom Ridge, 

Congressman Jim Turner, Sabre CEO Sam Gilliland, and American Airlines CEO 

Robert Crandall, this blue-ribbon panel issued a groundbreaking report, ‘‘A Better 

Way,’’ which made 14 recommendations for reforming TSA, based on the experience 

of security professionals, input from industry stakeholders, advice from privacy advocates, and surveys of travelers. Many of these recommendations were adopted by 

the agency and others were the focus of Congressional oversight and legislation. 

36 

In 2016, U.S. Travel urged the new administration and the new Congress to place 

a renewed focus on refining and enhancing the operations of TSA through the 

issuance of the report ‘‘Transforming Security at Airports: An Update on Progress 

and a Plan for the Future of Aviation Security,’’ U.S. Travel experts outlined several 

concrete recommendations for how the TSA can improve its operations and specific 

to this hearing, the TSA PreCheck® program. 

We recognize TSA is crucial not only to our National security, but also to the U.S. 

economy. U.S. Travel surveys have demonstrated that the public travels less when 

the system is bogged down by excessive or unpredictable wait times. These real or 

perceived failures impose an immense cost on the American economy. Research 

found that travelers would take between two and three more trips per year if TSA 

hassles could be reduced without compromising security effectiveness—and these 

additional trips would add $85 billion in spending and 888,000 more jobs to our 

economy. 

We urge the Trump administration and Congress to place a renewed focus on refining and enhancing the TSA PreCheck® program to increase participation, particularly making enrollment more convenient without sacrificing security. TSA’s 

mission to detect and deter security threats to the busiest aviation system in the 

world while facilitating the travel of nearly 775 million flyers per year is a complex, 

expensive, and extremely important undertaking. However, an effective TSA is crucial not only to our National security, but also to the U.S. economy. 

Unfortunately, TSA continues to struggle with a tumultuous budgetary environment, forcing the agency to regularly navigate a series of fiscal crises amid its usual 

operational challenges. Notably, TSA suffered a major budgetary setback when the 

Murray-Ryan 2013 budget deal became law. This law mandated that TSA fee increases be diverted to the General Fund as part of a deficit reduction package, 

which U.S. Travel opposed. These fees should have been appropriately reinvested 

into enhancing security measures and creating a first-class travel experience. 

As we work with Congress and the Trump administration, U.S. Travel is pleased 

to offer policy recommendations and our point of view on some of the most pressing 

issues facing our aviation security system—in particular TSA PreCheck®—suggesting reforms that would further improve security and air travel in America, protect traveler privacy and dignity and give the American people the best return on 

their investment of traveler fees and Government dollars. 

RECOMMENDATIONS

Improve and Grow the TSA PreCheck® 

TSA PreCheck® offers a faster security screening process to pre-vetted domestic 

and international travelers, alleviating long lines and freeing TSA officers to focus 

on unknown passengers. Approximately 6.1 million travelers are enrolled in TSA 

PreCheck® and an additional 2 million travelers enjoy TSA PreCheck® benefits via 

their enrollment in the U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) Global Entry 

program. In the interest of National security and providing a safe, efficient journey 

for travelers, U.S. Travel strongly advocates for the continued growth of TSA 

PreCheck®. Moving these low-risk flyers quickly through security reduces crowds 

in airport waiting areas and, more importantly, allows TSA screeners to focus their 

attention on unknown travelers. 

TSA PreCheck® refocuses resources on higher-risk passengers and expedites 

screening of low-risk, pre-vetted travelers. According to TSA, in April 2018, 92 percent of TSA PreCheck® passengers waited less than 5 minutes to go through security. The best opportunity to ensure security and get travelers through lines quickly 

is presented by effective trusted traveler programs such as TSA PreCheck®. The 

more eligible flyers sign up for PreCheck®, the safer and more efficient the air travel experience will be for all. Efforts to grow the program should focus on four Ps: 

Process, promotion, price, and prioritization. 

In 2016, U.S. Travel conducted a study and found that 1 in 5 travelers was deterred by the TSA PreCheck® application process. TSA should analyze and develop 

a process for spontaneous enrollment. Too often, the current requirement for two 

forms of identification is a significant barrier to travelers enrolling in the program 

and a modification to only one document would enable TSA to better reach its stated 

goal of 25 million enrollees. Furthermore, it is time for TSA to stop relying on 

earned media and start selling TSA PreCheck® through a dedicated and methodical 

marketing campaign. 

We are encouraged by private-sector initiatives to make it easier to apply for TSA 

PreCheck®, especially through relationships with companies with a large consumer 

footprint. For example, in April, IDEMIA, the current TSA PreCheck® contract 

holder, announced a partnership with Staples to deploy TSA PreCheck® enrollment 

37 

centers in 50 Staples locations around the country. We also understand that at least 

12 credit card programs cover the cost of TSA PreCheck®, and five travel loyalty 

programs allow TSA PreCheck® to be paid for via points or similar accumulated activity. National and Enterprise both have loyalty programs. U.S. Travel reimburses 

its employees for the full cost of both PreCheck®, and Global Entry. 

Reduce the Cost of TSA PreCheck® 

However, we have been disappointed by the slower corporate adoption of TSA 

PreCheck®, which may be largely due to the high cost of reimbursement imposed by the strict $85 enrollment fee. Offering corporations a financial incentive or cost 

break may help to spark more volume enrollments. In terms of companies, in 2016, 

Microsoft announced it would reimburse employees for both TSA PreCheck® and 

Global Entry. This decision came after then-DHS Secretary Jeh Johnson and thenCommerce Secretary Penny Pritzker wrote to 100 large U.S. companies requesting 

assistance in marketing and promoting TSA PreCheck®. The fact that very few companies have followed Microsoft’s lead may be because the up-front cost of an $85 

enrollment fee, multiplied by hundreds or thousands of employees, is a measurable 

and significant cost with harder-to-measure returns. Providing quantity discounts to 

corporate travel managers, especially those who supply applicants to TSA for on-site 

enrollment, may create more corporate interest. 

Additionally, while younger children (12 and under) are allowed to join a parent 

in the PreCheck® lane, older children cannot. The one-time cost of enrolling a family of five may be a significant factor for many families and deter enrollment. We 

encourage TSA and its partners at the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) 

to reconsider fee rules for children, offer volume discounts, and explore a subscription model for fees that would be paid on an annual basis, not 5 years at a time. 

Improve TSA PreCheck® Lane Management 

U.S. Travel has expressed repeated concerns about TSA’s on-again, off-again use 

of programs like ‘‘managed inclusion’’ that allow non-PreCheck® individuals into the 

TSA PreCheck® screening lanes. First, such blending of populations confuses the 

traveling public about the TSA PreCheck® program and the value to both the Government and the traveler to undergo a program enrollment. Second, allowing TSA 

employees on-the-ground discretion to determine passenger risk profiles on the spot 

is both a security risk and a potential for traveler complaints. 

We recognize that arranging security lanes and machines is a complicated process 

that does not always create the right mix of pre-vetted and normal travelers. However, the continued practice of providing TSA PreCheck® access because security 

lines are too long is a self-defeating process. U.S. Travel supports the use of passenger screening canines (PSCs), which increases security and efficiency in the general passenger screening process, often with greater accuracy than conventional 

methods, but if PSCs are going to be used to replace the screening done in the 

PreCheck® application process, TSA will reduce the known, low-risk travelers who 

would otherwise enroll in the program. 

Expedite the enlistment of third-party prescreening companies 

TSA has faced several road blocks in expanding the number of third-party 

prescreening companies to sign individuals up for the program. Currently, there is 

only one third-party prescreening company. It is worth repeating that there is only 

one third-party vendor that prescreens applicants, markets the program, enrolls applicants and adjudicates their application. This is just not acceptable. There should 

be multiple companies. This will drive competition, reduce costs, and help grow TSA 

PreCheck®, enrollment. 

Redirect Airline Passenger Fees to Cover the Cost of and Improve TSA Screening Operations 

Last, but not least, domestic and international travel are key drivers of the U.S. 

economy, supporting 15.6 million jobs, $2.4 trillion in economic output, and $258 billion in wages. This growth is positive for the U.S. economy and job creation as a 

whole, but these increases and persistent funding fluctuations are straining TSA’s 

current staffing resources. It is imperative for TSA to continually strive to develop 

and deploy strategies that will optimize its current workforce. 

The 2013 budget deal (known as ‘‘Murray-Ryan’’) increased TSA fees from $2.50 

per segment to $5.60, but used the increased Federal revenue as a general revenue 

measure, failing to provide the funds to TSA. Thus, more than one-third of all airline passenger fees collected are being diverted from TSA aviation security screening 

to the General Fund until fiscal year 2025. As a result, travelers are paying considerably more in user fees but are not receiving the benefits of their fees in terms 

of better TSA performance, shorter lines, or better-trained screeners. 

38 

This provision was included in the budget deal as one of many measures designed 

to meet revenue targets and avert additional worry about a Government shutdown 

or debt limit crisis. Changes to TSA ticket taxes had been proposed numerous times 

by the Bush, Obama, and Trump administrations but were always rejected by Congress as an inappropriate additional tax on travelers. During this budget negotiation, however, the breadth of the budget package made it possible for negotiators 

to not only include ticket tax increases, but also to use the additional revenue as 

an offset for spending outside of DHS or TSA. Over the objection of the travel and 

aviation industries, the provision became law in early 2014, and became effective 

in July 2014. 

Comparing 2013 to 2017, travelers paid $2 billion more in fees—$3.9 billion vs. 

$1.9 billion—for the exact same service. This diversion essentially requires travelers 

to fund aspects of Government completely unrelated to TSA’s mission—anything 

from military bands to education funding to flood control. 

While we recognize the emergency nature of the Murray-Ryan deficit reduction 

package, Congress must reverse the on-going diversion. Revenue raised from aviation security fees should go toward securing travelers, not to deficit reduction. We 

support solutions to repeal the current requirement that a portion of aviation security service fees be credited as offsetting receipts and deposited into the General 

Fund of the Treasury. More broadly, we encourage Congress to ensure that security 

funding is used to improve all aspects of aviation security including, but not limited 

to, staffing, developing technologies, and checkpoint and airport facility enhancements. 

Thank you for the opportunity to testify today on behalf of the U.S. travel and 

tourism industry. For U.S. Travel, nothing matters more than the safety of our Nation and travelers. We appreciate your holding this hearing to explore ways to make 

TSA PreCheck®, more efficient and effective both from a security and facilitation 

perspective. 

Mr. KATKO. Thank you Ms. Howerton. I appreciate your testimony. You made some great points we will follow up on. I am glad 

that TSA has remained here so they are hearing it as well. I thank 

you for staying and taking the time. 

Our second witness is Ms. Sharon Pinkerton, the senior vice 

president of legislative and regulatory policy for Airlines for America. In this position, Ms. Pinkerton leads policy development on legislative and regulatory matters, working closely with Capitol Hill 

and the administration. 

Before joining A4A, she served as an assistant administrator for 

aviation policy, planning, and environment at the Federal Aviation 

Administration. Prior to her time at the FAA, she served as transportation counsel to House Aviation Subcommittee Chairman John 

Mica. You are dating yourself. Ms. Pinkerton is now recognized for 

5 minutes for an opening statement. 

STATEMENT OF SHARON L. PINKERTON, SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT, LEGISLATIVE AND REGULATORY POLICY, AIRLINES 

FOR AMERICA 

Ms. PINKERTON. Thank you Chairman Katko. We appreciate— 

thank you so much, Chairman Katko. We appreciate the opportunity to be here today to talk to you about these important issues. 

My real message to you all today is really to say thank you. I 

think that as a result of your work, TSAs work together, 

partnering with airlines and airports we are cautiously optimistic 

that TSA is ready for the summer travel. Four percent growth, it 

is significant. 

Now the reason for the caution in my optimism is that we 

haven’t forgotten what happened in 2016. We have talked about it 

here today. There was a terrible DHS IG report. TSA ratcheted the 

dials on the security equation in one way without adjusting staffing 

39 

and other processes. We did end up with 3-hour wait times, and 

I think that is something none of us want. 

So our lesson learned is that actions have consequences. Now, 

that is why, Chairman Katko, we are supporting your idea of 

transitioning away from using K–9s and rules to put non-PreCheck 

passengers into the PreCheck lane. As long as that is coupled with 

the other side of the security equation, which is as we discussed, 

getting more people into the PreCheck lane. Or this other idea that 

I would like to start putting on the table, which is having another 

vetting procedure in place that will enable some form of known 

travelers to have a different experience, not necessarily the 

PreCheck experience, but a risk-based security experience. 

Said another way, I think we have to start by understanding 

that staffing isn’t the be-all and end-all. it is one very important 

part of the puzzle. Commend TSA for getting us up to somewhere 

between 600—1,600 more FTEs year-over-year. 

But it is really important that we actually look at this as a process in improving our security processes, and very importantly, deploying better technology. So it is with that big picture that we are 

making the following recommendations. I want to talk about 

PreCheck first. 

If we all agree that we don’t want to put non-PreCheck passengers into the PreCheck lane, the question that is still on the 

table is: How do we get those PreCheck numbers up? We are not 

on a path right now to meet the 25 million that TSA had. 

First, I think we all need to recognize that, for some reason, despite Chairman Katko’s legislation and the legislation embraced by 

this subcommittee, the third-party enrollment program has not delivered. I am not quite sure how it has gotten all bolloxed up, but 

I think you need to get to the bottom of that. 

What I would like to think about is what—what can we do, putting that aside for—for the moment. We heard Darby mention a little bit. TSA and CBP need to merge their Trusted Traveler programs. We have got two programs out there. Two sets of infrastructure. Two sets of locations. 

We need to merge those where it makes sense. Instead of having 

TSA and CBP compete, let us combine resources and have one simple, easy to use application process. I think that working together, 

TSA and CBP are going to be able to make signing up more accessible. 

Darby mentioned moving toward mobile enrollment, we should 

be there today. We are living in a mobile society, there is no reason 

for us not to have mobile enrollment. Let us make those enrollment 

centers more location-friendly and not so far away. The schedule 

needs to be something other than 8 to 4. All the ideas that Lorraine talked about, about some fee incentives for families and big 

groups make a lot of sense. 

Let’s move on to some other ideas. We believe that, if Congress 

truly believes that 99 percent—let us even say 95 percent of the 

traveling public is not the problem, we are really looking for that 

small percentage of people that are a problem, we need to start 

thinking differently about the checkpoint. We believe that passengers who may be willing to submit commercial data and subject 

themselves to a different level of vetting, maybe not as far as the 

40 

PreCheck level of vetting, but something that is easier and faster, 

can get a different experience; perhaps using dogs, the Managed 

Inclusion, et cetera, that is one way to achieve some efficiencies. 

TSA and CBP need to start working together on biometrics. 

Right now they are both going in different directions. We need, 

again, to harmonize and focus on technology that is going to enable 

a more smooth process at the airport, but also increase our security. 

We need to accelerate the CT technology. Again, I want to say 

thank you, the language in the omnibus was very helpful, but 

that—we need to move that deployment on quicker, we need more 

machines out there more quickly. I know you have been to Amsterdam, I have as well. I think it is good for screeners, it is good for 

the detection of the types of emerging threats that we are seeing. 

Can’t say enough about dogs, it is one of our highest priorities. 

We are not where we need to be, you know, Darby mentioned they 

are at 242 right now, they should be at 372. We are pushing the 

TSA accelerate their third-party K–9 certification program, both in 

cargo where they are making more progress, but also in the passenger environment. 

Finally, couldn’t agree more with Lorraine, we are diverting $1.3 

billion every year away from security and making it go to deficit 

reduction. That needs to change, that money could come back in, 

be spend on CT and dogs, and I look forward to having the conversation with you. Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Pinkerton follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF SHARON L. PINKERTON

MAY 17, 2018 

Good morning Chairman Katko, Ranking Member Watson Coleman, and Members 

of the subcommittee. My name is Sharon Pinkerton and I am the senior vice president of legislative and regulatory policy at Airlines for America (A4A). Thank you 

for inviting me here today to discuss aviation security and the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) PreCheck program. 

Overview.—The safety and security of our passengers and employees is our single 

highest priority and we take aviation security very seriously. We share this common 

goal with the TSA and work cooperatively and collaboratively with them every day 

through programs like Known Crew Member (KCM) and TSA PreCheck (amongst 

many others) in an effort to keep our skies safe and secure with a focus on both 

passenger and cargo security. 

When talking about the day-in and day-out challenges of aviation security it is 

important to be reminded of and to understand the depth and magnitude of what 

actually takes place and what is transported by air every single day. On a daily 

basis, U.S. airlines— 

• Fly more than 2 million passengers; 

• Carry close to 50,000 tons of cargo; 

• Operate approximately 27,000 flights; and 

• Serve more than 800 airports in nearly 80 countries; 

Given the vast geography and sheer numbers it is exceedingly important that we 

approach security in a smart, effective, and efficient manner that best utilizes the 

finite resources available. This becomes even more imperative given the expectation 

that both passenger and cargo traffic will grow in the coming years. 

Risk-Based Security.—The administration of risk-based security principles is of 

paramount importance to aviation security today and in the future. A risk-based approach recognizes that ‘‘one size fits all’’ security is not the optimum response to 

threats. Risk-based, intelligence-driven analysis has been a widely-accepted apVerDate Mar 15 2010 12:29 Nov 01, 2018 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00044 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 H:\115TH CONGRESS\18TP0517\18TP0517.TXT HEATH
41 

1 In its final report, the Commission stated: ‘‘The U.S. Government should identify and evaluate the transportation assets that need to be protected, set risk-based priorities for defending 

them, [and] select the most practical and cost effective ways of doing so... ’’. Final Report 

of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States, at 391 (2004). 

proach to aviation security for some time. The 9/11 Commission, for example, in 

2004 called for thorough, risk-based analysis in evaluating aviation-security issues.1

One of our Nation’s greatest challenges is to strike the right balance between 

managing risk and over-regulation. Enhanced security and the efficient movement 

of passengers and cargo are not mutually exclusive goals, thus Government and industry must continue to work together to find pragmatic approaches to security that 

appropriately balance these issues. If we do not achieve that balance, we will lose 

passenger and shipper goodwill, clog up our airports, slow world trade and in fact 

diminish the level of security we have currently achieved. By utilizing and following 

risk-based principles we provide a security framework that can be more nimble and 

responsive to current and emerging threats and allows TSA to focus resources on 

high-risk passengers and cargo. 

As we will discuss today, TSA PreCheck is a fundamental layer and key program 

component of an effective and efficient risk-based security system. Today we will 

share our recommendations for how the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), 

Customs and Border Protection (CBP) and TSA can improve enrollment in TSA and 

other screening programs. We also believe it is time for a reassessment of DHS 

screening programs to look at potential ways to modernize and potentially create 

categories or levels of lower-risk passengers that may not be in or want to join TSA 

PreCheck but that could be identified and more effectively moved through security 

in a manner that takes less TSA screening resources. 

The Lesson of the Summer of 2016.—Our industry has not forgotten the summer 

of 2016 when many travelers unfortunately experienced unacceptably long TSA 

screening lines at airports across the Nation. The root causes of those excessively 

long wait times were clear to many. Looking back at the previous summer in 2015 

there was a record-setting travel season but the system did not experience excessive 

wait times. However, in 2016, as a result of reported TSA screening failures in a 

DHS Inspector General’s report, DHS significantly cut back on risk-based security 

efficiencies without making an adjustment to staffing and other processes to accommodate those modifications. This is a key lesson learned: Every action taken has 

consequences, some unintended. Given the known and immediate impacts, we do 

not believe TSA should simply stop the current practice of using canines and a 

rules-based approach to give certain passengers a TSA PreCheck experience without 

taking action on the other end of the security equation to ensure that more people 

are enrolled in TSA PreCheck or have another vetting procedure in place that will 

enable a Known Traveler experience for low-risk passengers. We strongly support 

TSA’s transition plan to segment and screen passengers differently while they eliminate the practice of using canines. 

If there is a silver lining to the 2016 summer experience it would be the collaborative discussions and close daily collaboration amongst Government and stakeholders under Administrator Pekoske’s leadership. As a result, airlines have worked 

with TSA and airports to institute best practices. The TSA has also established a 

National Airport Operations Center that tracks daily screening operations and 

shifts officers and resources where they are needed most based on passenger volumes. This collaboration is not the exception, it is enshrined in our daily routine 

and operations and it has significantly elevated our security baseline across the entire system. Coordination and collaboration makes our system more safe and we are 

now better prepared on a daily basis than we have ever been. 

To that end, we would also like to thank Congress for your assistance and attention to TSA’s staffing. For instance, we know we will see about 4 percent growth 

this summer travel season but through your assistance TSA expects to have an additional 1,600 officers hired and 50 extra canines on board to deal with that anticipated growth. That said, we are interested in understanding TSA’s plan for maintaining reasonable throughput if airlines and airports were to no longer supply contract labor support for non-screening functions as this support was intended to temporarily assist during the Summer 2016 crisis. 

We must realize though that staffing is just one part of the puzzle. Improving the 

security process and deploying better technology are critical elements in our continued efforts to ensure a secure system that also improves the passenger experience. 

In ‘‘assessing the TSA checkpoint’’, A4A offers the following recommendations to 

modernize our system: 

• Merge TSA PreCheck and CBP Global Entry and eliminate the duplication of 

processes; 

42 

• Create a new segment of vetted passengers using third-party commercial data 

that allows for a form of expedited screening; 

• Accelerate deployment of Computed Tomography (CT) Technology; 

• Allow TSA and CBP to jointly utilize opt-in biometrics to improve security and 

facilitation; 

• Utilize and expand the use of canine teams; and 

• Stop the annual practice of diverting passenger security fee revenue. 

Merge TSA PreCheck and CBP Global Entry and eliminate the duplication of processes.—As an industry, we are promoting expedited screening programs, and in 

many cases our members are waiving the cost of enrollment for some frequent flyers 

and providing space at airports to set up walk-up processing stations. Airlines also 

work collaboratively with TSA on the KCM program, which now processes 250,000+ 

crewmembers through separate access points. Much work needs to be done however, 

while we did see significant growth in the number of TSA PreCheck enrollees in the 

aftermath of the summer of 2016, that bump has since leveled off and we are currently not on a path to reach the TSA goal of 25 million enrollees. In order to reach 

and hopefully exceed that goal, we would specifically recommend that DHS—— 

• Merge Global Entry and TSA PreCheck to create a unified DHS vetting program; 

• Fast-track a robust and aggressive marketing campaign through third-party enrollment options; 

• Allow mobile enrollment; 

• Make the enrollment centers more accessible by adjusting locations and schedules; and 

• Consider reducing the enrollment fee for families. 

Create a new segment of vetted passengers using third-party commercial data that 

allows for a form of expedited screening.—We are eager to work with TSA to create 

a program that further develops a risk-based approach to screening. Since we are 

limited by space at the airport, we need to find ways to make better use of existing 

space. If we believe that 99 percent of the traveling public are lower-risk, we should 

begin to segment that 99 percent into categories to provide a different level of 

screening based on vetting. For now, those willing to opt-in to a background check 

through fingerprints are admitted into TSA PreCheck. Those willing to undergo a 

different kind of vetting using public and personally-supplied data could be put in 

a different lane with a different level of screening than either TSA PreCheck or the 

passengers about whom nothing is known. 

Accelerate deployment of CT Technology.—Last year, the TSA implemented measures to address concerns about new, intelligence-backed threats concealed in personal electronic devices (PEDs). Those measures, requiring greater passenger divestiture, have created longer passenger lines at some checkpoints. While we applaud 

TSA’s responsiveness to the threat, we ultimately believe greater investment in 

technology must be prioritized so that TSA can both improve its threat detection 

capabilities, optimize staffing performance, and maintain passenger throughput at 

reasonable levels. 

We are particularly enthusiastic about TSA’s testing of 3D scanning or CT because of the enhanced detection capabilities and easy upgradability. We believe 

checkpoint CT will help TSA focus on the threat in real time and will significantly 

improve screening effectiveness and efficiency. 

We are also encouraged by the support and interest of Congressional stakeholders 

and the serious efforts by TSA to test, enhance, and demonstrate this capability and 

we applaud the fiscal year 2018 funding support provided by the Congress to rapidly 

advance, begin fielding CT, and replace over 2,400 advanced technology X-ray systems. Some of our members have gifted CT units to TSA in an effort to expedite 

testing and certification of the technology. While this practice isn’t sustainable, we 

believe it shows our commitment to improving our risk-based aviation security 

framework. We urge the committee to continue to prioritize the deployment of CT 

across our aviation system. 

Allow TSA and CBP to jointly utilize opt-in biometrics to improve security and facilitation.—If TSA and CBP were to jointly advance the adoption of biometric technology for identity management in the airport environment, DHS could both improve security and transform the passenger air travel experience. A unified DHS approach for collecting and utilizing biometric data is critical to enhancing security 

and leveraging scarce taxpayer and passenger resources. Right now, TSA and CBP 

are pursuing different biometric solutions with TSA using fingerprints and CBP piloting facial recognition, when we should be pursuing a more harmonized and common-sense approach that improves both security and facilitation without putting unnecessary cost burdens on the industry. 

43 

Utilize and expand the use of canine teams.—The use of canine teams has been 

a tremendous success in both the passenger and cargo security environment. We 

would advocate that Congress continue to support and expand the canine program. 

We also encourage TSA to accelerate their third-party canine certification program 

for cargo and passenger canines. 

Stop the annual practice of diverting passenger security fee revenue.—U.S. aviation 

and its customers are subject to 17 Federal aviation taxes and ‘‘fees’’, in addition 

to standard corporate taxes. In fiscal year 2017 alone, special U.S. taxes on airlines 

and their customers totaled over $24 billion—more than $66 million per day. Included within those numbers are revenues that are intended to support activities 

within the DHS. These ‘‘fees’’ include the—— • September 11th TSA Passenger Security Fee—a $5.60 fee imposed per one-way 

trip on passengers enplaning at U.S. airports with a limit of $11.20 per round 

trip; the fee also applies to inbound international passengers making a U.S. connection. • Customs User Fee (CUF)—a $5.65 fee on passengers arriving in the United 

States from foreign locations to fund inspections by U.S. Customs and Border 

Protection (CBP); passengers arriving from U.S. territories and possessions are 

exempt. • Immigration User Fee (IUF)—a $7.00 fee imposed on passengers arriving in the 

United States from foreign locations to fund inspections performed by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). 

As an industry we have seen an all-too-common trend of either directly or indirectly diverting the revenue collected from these ‘‘fees’’ toward deficit reduction or 

other sectors of the Government. For instance, starting in 2001 the TSA passenger 

security fee had been limited to $2.50 per passenger enplanement with a maximum 

fee of $5.00 per one-way trip. However, starting in July 2014, pursuant to the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2013, the fee was restructured into a single per-trip charge and 

increased to $5.60 per one-way trip. That increase, over the 10-year period from fiscal years 2014–2023, is projected to raise $40 billion with $13 billion for deficit reduction. Subsequently, this diversion practice was continued and extended in both 

the 2015 Highway bill (Pub. L. 114–41) and the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2018. Specifically, these laws have already diverted or will divert—— • $390,000,000 for fiscal year 2014; • $1,190,000,000 for fiscal year 2015; • $1,250,000,000 for fiscal year 2016; • $1,280,000,000 for fiscal year 2017; • $1,320,000,000 for fiscal year 2018; • $1,360,000,000 for fiscal year 2019; • $1,400,000,000 for fiscal year 2020; • $1,440,000,000 for fiscal year 2021; 

• $1,480,000,000 for fiscal year 2022; 

• $1,520,000,000 for fiscal year 2023; 

• $1,560,000,000 for fiscal year 2024; 

• $1,600,000,000 for fiscal year 2025 

• $1,640,000,000 for fiscal year 2026; and 

• $1,680,000,000 for fiscal year 2027. 

Airlines and their customers now pay $1.6 billion more in TSA security fees—$3.9 

billion (2017) vs. $2.3 billion (2013)—for the exact same service. A similar story can 

be told in regards to customs user fees. The concept of a ‘‘fee’’ specifically charged 

to pay for a specific service has long been lost in our industry and they have all 

simply become taxes by another name. 

We would respectfully request this committee do everything in its power to redirect TSA passenger security fee revenue back where it belongs: Paying for aviation 

security. These diverted funds could go a long way to not only expanding enrollment 

in TSA PreCheck but also deploying critical technology like CT. 

Importance of Commercial Aviation Sector.—Airlines crisscross the country and 

globe every day carrying passengers and cargo safely and securely to their destinations and is an integral part of the economy. In 2014, according to the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), economic activity in the United States attributed to commercial aviation-related goods and services totaled $1.54 trillion, generating 10.2 

million jobs with $427 billion in earnings. As of December 2016 our industry directly 

employed nearly 700,000 workers and contributes 5 percent of our Nation’s GDP. 

These facts underscore what is at stake and why we need to approach aviation 

security in a smart, effective, and efficient manner and make sure we get it right. 

The daily collaboration and communication between TSA and stakeholders will play 

a vital role toward that goal and programs like TSA PreCheck are essential to our 

risk-based security system being successful. 

44 

Thank you, on behalf of our member companies, we appreciate the opportunity 

to testify. 

Mr. KATKO. Thank you very much, excellent points you have 

made. As always, I appreciate your testimony. 

Our third witness is Ms. Wendy Reiter, who is testifying on behalf of the American Association of Airport Executives. 

Ms. Reiter currently serves as director of aviation security for Seattle/Tacoma International Airport. We often get excellent input 

from them and I am looking forward to hearing—hearing from you 

again. 

In this position, she leads the port of Seattle’s Aviation Security 

Department and oversees all TSA mandates that involve the security of the 16,000 employees and travelers at the SeaTac Airport. 

Prior to joining the port of Seattle, Ms. Reiter was a station manager for Southwest Airlines and director of customer service for 

Northwest Airlines, where she received numerous awards for leadership and outstanding customer service. 

Ms. Reiter is now recognized for 5 minutes for an opening statement. 

STATEMENT OF WENDY REITER, DIRECTOR OF AVIATION SECURITY, SEATTLE/TACOMA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT, TESTIFYING ON BEHALF OF THE AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF 

AIRPORT EXECUTIVES 

Ms. REITER. Chairman Katko and Members of the subcommittee, 

thank you for the opportunity to discuss operations at TSA checkpoints, the PreCheck program and the airport wait times. 

My name is Wendy Reiter and I currently serve as the director 

of aviation security for Seattle/Tacoma Airport, which is owned and 

operated by Port of Seattle. I also recently served as vice chair of 

the Transportation Security Services Committee of America Association of Airport Executives. 

The story of Sea/Tac is one of dramatic growth, from 31 million 

passengers in 2010 to almost 47 million last year. The growth is 

a reflection of the dynamic economy and the global relevance of the 

Puget Sound region and Sea/Tac’s increasingly important role in 

the National airspace system. 

At Sea/Tac, we are working overtime to try and accommodate the 

increasing demand. On our side, that required major investment in 

infrastructure, technology, and staffing. We are currently in the 

midst of a $3 billion capital investment program, and have spent 

more than $20 million in staffing and technology to reduce the burden on TSA and increase the efficiency at their checkpoints. 

Similarly, TSA is being required to quickly increase their capacity to handle our growth. We deeply appreciate the partnership 

that we have with them, including both local TSA staff and TSA 

leadership in Washington, DC. 

I also want to thank the subcommittee for your work on the 

Checkpoint Optimization and Efficiency Act, which has resulted in 

improved collaboration, communication, and information sharing at 

the local level. 

However, there is more work that needs to be done. At Sea/Tac 

we have set a wait time goal of 20 minutes or less at the passenger 

45 

screening checkpoints. We see this effort not only as a customer 

service priority, but a critical security measure. 

We know the best way to protect a soft target such as an aggregation of people in the public area is to process them to the sterile 

side of the airport as quickly as possible. Unfortunately, meeting 

that goal has been difficult, in large part because TSA hiring cannot keep pace with the attrition of TSA officers to the hiring—to 

the higher paying jobs that our region’s economy is creating. 

To give you a sense of our challenges, we have 32 lanes currently 

available for security screening, yet TSA has not been able to staff 

more than 26 lanes recently at peak. We are approaching wait 

times of almost 1 hour. 

To compensate, we rely greatly on TSA’s use of passenger screening K–9s for what they refer to as K–9 enhanced screening. While 

we consistently encounter issues with K–9 availability, we believe 

that these dogs are the best possible investment that the TSA can 

make. 

Their accuracy is even better than screening machines and they 

assess current threats, rather than PreCheck’s vetting of background risks, they provide the greatest efficiency gains, therefore 

we have significant concerns about reducing the ability to offer 

modified screening for general lane passengers that are screened by 

K–9s. 

We strongly support efforts to maximize TSA PreCheck enrollment; however, we know that one of the biggest threats to airports 

and passenger security is long wait times that create soft targets. 

Reducing the throughput benefits of K–9s will increase that 

threat by more than doubling wait times at Sea/Tac’s general 

screening lanes. Just this morning, the call out of one K–9 resulted 

in incident command because wait times that push general screening lanes onto our escalators. 

TSA should also take consideration the impact of wait times of 

the deployment of CT machines in the next few years. We support 

the added security that advanced technology will provide, but significant work will need to be done to address its implementation 

impacts, such as throughput rates, false alarm resolutions, and 

physical checkpoint configurations. 

While passenger screening is by law the sole responsibility of 

TSA, airports play a critical role a partners. To that end, we hope 

that any changes that would impact security would be done in collaboration with us rather than being imposed. 

Thank you for your time today and I look forward to your questions. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Reiter follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF WENDY REITER

MAY 17, 2018 

Chairman Katko, Ranking Member Watson Coleman, and Members of the subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to discuss operations at Transportation 

Security Administration (TSA) checkpoints, the PreCheck program and airport wait 

times. My name is Wendy Reiter, and I currently serve as the director of aviation 

security for Seattle-Tacoma International Airport (Sea-Tac), which is owned and operated by the Port of Seattle. I also recently served as vice-chair of the Transportation Security Services Committee of the American Association of Airport Executives (AAAE). 

46 

To put my remarks in context, let me start by sharing the growth that Sea-Tac 

has been experiencing, and the impact that has had on our airport’s TSA security 

screening checkpoints. In 2010, Sea-Tac served 31 million passengers; last year— 

a mere 7 years later—we saw almost 47 million passengers. This growth is a reflection of the increasing economic dynamism and global relevance of the Puget Sound 

region and Washington State. With innovative companies such as Boeing, Microsoft, 

Amazon, and Starbucks along with disruptive start-ups in biotech, global health, retail, manufacturing, and IT, our economy is booming, and the Seattle area has one 

of the fastest-growing populations in the country. Those individuals and businesses 

demand more air service. 

It is not just the robust Seattle economy that requires Sea-Tac Airport to scramble 

to handle this extraordinary increase in airline traffic; Sea-Tac is playing an increasingly important role in the National Airspace System (NAS). Over the last 7 

years, almost a dozen new international carriers have introduced service to our airport, while our hub carriers have expanded flights, destinations, and plane sizes. As 

aircraft technology has evolved and as foreign flag airlines have initiated non-stop 

service from cities across Asia to U.S. cities, Seattle’s role as a critical U.S. gateway 

to Asia has become more pronounced. This circumstance has certainly benefited the 

Seattle region, but, more importantly, it has made the NAS more efficient by effectively replacing a Northeast Asia hub with a U.S. gateway hub. Quite logically, 

there is a growing amount of ‘‘feed’’ traffic from all over the United States to Seattle 

to make the most efficient use of a gateway that is closer than any other in the 

United States to the vast majority of Asian destinations. 

The point is that Sea-Tac is serving more and more passengers, and we are working overtime to try and accommodate that demand. On our side, that requires major 

investments in infrastructure, technology, and staffing, and we are currently in the 

midst of a $3 billion capital investment plan, with another $5 billion plan in the 

works. We’ve also invested tens of millions of dollars in additional staffing and on 

exit lane and screening lane technologies to do our part to reduce the burden on 

TSA and increase the efficiency of their checkpoints. 

But regardless of what we do, TSA is being required to quickly increase their resources and capacity to handle our growth. We deeply appreciate the partnership 

we have with them to try and accommodate this demand, including both our local 

TSA staff and TSA leadership in Washington, DC. I also want to thank Chairman 

Katko and the subcommittee for your work a few years ago on the Checkpoint Optimization and Efficiency Act, which was passed into law as part of the FAA Extension Safety and Security Act of 2016. I was honored to be part of a roundtable discussion this subcommittee hosted prior to drafting that legislation and I am glad 

Congress agreed with so many of the recommendations of how to address what was 

then a crisis at the checkpoints. The result has been increased Federal Security Director (FSD) discretion and improved collaboration, communications, and information sharing at the local level. However, there is more work that still needs to be 

done. 

At Sea-Tac, we have set a goal of getting all travelers through the passenger 

screening checkpoints in 20 minutes or less. We see this effort not only as a customer service priority but also a security measure, because the best way to protect 

an aggregation of people from perimeter threats is to disperse them to the sterile 

side of our airport as quickly as possible. 

Unfortunately, meeting that 20-minute goal has been difficult, in large part because TSA hiring cannot keep pace with the attrition of Transportation Security Officers (TSOs) to the better, higher-paying jobs that our region’s economy is creating. 

Although TSA has implemented faster hiring procedures, increased outreach, recruitment and retention bonuses and local training, TSO attrition rates translate directly into fewer operational screening lanes and longer checkpoint wait times; to 

give you a sense of our challenges, we are only averaging around 65 percent of customers making it through the checkpoints under our 20-minute goal. Those wait 

times have been consistently increasing since the fall of 2017. 

Because of those TSA staffing challenges, we rely greatly on TSA’s use of passenger screening canines for what the agency refers to as Canine Enhanced Screening. These dogs have been able to almost double the throughput of our checkpoints, 

when deployed, and are an unmatched resource in helping us achieve our customer 

service and security goals. In fact, we believe that TSA canines are the best possible 

investment that the TSA can make; they provide the biggest efficiency gains, their 

accuracy is even better than screening machines, and they assess current threats 

rather than PreCheck’s vetting of background risks. 

Like most large and fast-growing airports throughout the country, we consistently 

encounter issues with the availability of canines; being staffed to our allotted number of canines; transfer of canines to other airports; or time spent in training and 

47 

certification. It took almost a year and a half between when the TSA model assigned 

us 10 passenger screening canines to when we reached that level this past March, 

and we’re still in a situation where some of those 10 dogs are only temporary transfer canines. This subcommittee knows all too well the challenges at Lackland Air 

Force Base with increasing National canine capacity, and Sea-Tac has been a 

staunch advocate—in partnership with U.S. Senator Maria Cantwell—for exploring 

third-party canine training and certification options. I would like to thank the subcommittee for their efforts on this topic, and please consider us a partner as you 

work to move forward. 

Given the challenges that we already have with TSO and canine availability, we 

have significant concerns about plans under consideration that would reduce the 

ability of TSA to offer modified screening for general lane passengers screened by 

canines. We can ill afford any changes to procedures that would decrease throughput and increase security risks to our airport. 

We appreciate the importance of increasing enrollment in the TSA PreCheck program, and the benefit to airport security that comes from those vetted passengers. 

But the program is not yet living up to its full potential; enrollment numbers have 

consistently been below projected volumes, and enrollment options are severely limited. We believe strongly that TSA needs to first follow the direction mandated by 

Congress in the FAA Extension, Safety, and Security Act of 2016 to increase the 

public’s enrollment access to the program; to deploy TSA-approved ready-to-market 

private-sector solutions; to partner with the private sector to use kiosks, mobile devices, or other mobile enrollment platforms to make enrollment easier; and to consider leveraging existing resources and abilities at airports to conduct fingerprint 

and background checks. Only then, once certain enrollment benchmarks are met, 

should TSA implement plans to scale back the use of canine enhanced screening. 

Taking these steps in the reverse order is a recipe for disaster—reducing both customer service and security. TSA PreCheck is an important threat reduction program, but we believe strongly that the bigger threat to airport and passenger security is long wait times that create soft targets for those that seek to inflict harm 

and terror on our facilities. Reducing the throughput benefits of canines would increase wait times at general screening lanes exponentially, erasing any security 

gains from incentivizing PreCheck enrollment. 

The timing of such changes should also take into consideration the massive deployment of Computed Tomography (CT) machines in the next few years. We support the added security that this advanced technology will provide but understand 

the significant work that will need to be done to address some of the challenges that 

its implementation will bring—such as throughput rates, false alarm resolutions, 

and physical checkpoint configurations. TSA has not yet substantially engaged airport operators in sharing the plans for deploying the CT equipment, and our own 

experience working with TSA on ASL implementation has shown us the significant 

amount of time and resources necessary to see the full efficiency impacts of a new 

technology. 

While responsibility for passenger screening is, by law, the sole responsibility of 

TSA, airports play a critical role in partnering with the agency to help it meet its 

core mission. Airports perform a number of inherently local security-related functions at their facilities, including incident response and management, perimeter security, employee credentialing, access control, infrastructure and operations planning, and numerous local law enforcement and public safety functions. To that end, 

we hope that any changes that would impact security would be done in collaboration 

with us, rather than being imposed. 

The Port of Seattle looks forward to continuing to partner with TSA to ensure effective, efficient, and innovative security operations for the screening of passengers. 

Thank you for your time today, and I look forward to your questions. 

Mr. KATKO. Thank you very much, Mr. Reiter, I am kind-of 

taken aback by the fact that you have 1-hour wait times. That is 

something that is not good from a security standpoint. 

It is an unsecure area of the airport, and that is exactly what 

we don’t want to hear, so we are going to have to address that in 

a meaningful manner. We will follow up on that with our questions, for sure. 

Let us see, the next witness here is Mr. Michael McCormick, the 

executive director and chief operating officer for the Global Business Travel Association. In his current role, Mr. McCormick leads 

GBTA’s growth and globalization initiatives. Previously he served 

48 

as managing partner of Hudson Crossing, LLC, a travel industry 

advisory business. McCormick has also served as president of 

biztravel.com and vice president of global supplier relations for 

Rosenbluth International. 

Mr. McCormick is now recognized for 5 minutes for an opening 

statement. 

STATEMENT OF MICHAEL W. MCCORMICK, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR AND CHIEF OPERATING OFFICER, GLOBAL BUSINESS 

TRAVEL ASSOCIATION 

Mr. MCCORMICK. Thank you, Chairman Katko, Ranking Member 

Watson Coleman, and Members of the subcommittee. We appreciate the opportunity to testify today. 

I am Michael McCormick. I am executive director and chief operating officer of the Global Business Travel Association, a role I 

have been in since 2009. 

GBTA is the world’s premier business travel and meetings trade 

association, headquartered here in Alexandria with operations on 

six continents. We have over 9,500 members, and manage over 

$345 billion worth of global business travel and meeting expenditures annually. GBTA has 38 chapters and affiliates across this 

country and operations around the world. 

I want to thank Chairman Katko for the time he recently spent 

in our New York State chapter. They are still bragging to all the 

other chapters about your January visit. 

GBTA’s annual convention in the United States is the must-attend event a year for business travel. We will have 7,000 attendees 

in San Diego this year, with people from all over the United States 

as well as 50 countries. 

Last year’s event had an economic impact of $22.5 billion—million, just on the city of Boston alone in those 4 days. The event and 

the economic impact is just a small sample of the total impact of 

business travel and practice. Although we are a global organization, we are celebrating our 50th anniversary as a U.S. trade association here in Virginia. 

So in July 2017, we released a report that really showed the industry is responsible for $547 billion, about 3 percent of U.S. GDP, 

which is about the size of the domestic auto market. 

We support 7.4 million jobs and $135 billion in Federal, State, 

and local taxes. You know, we always say that business travel 

drives business growth. Companies invest in business travel to 

drive new business, create new jobs, and build shareholder value. 

But as this busy summer season ramps up, we are concerned— 

as all of you are—about the past travel problems in screening as 

well as past statements and policies on foreign visitation, and the 

impact that has, not only in 2018 but beyond. 

Secure and efficient travel is a key platform in our legislative 

policy. We have been a supporter of PreCheck since the first 

iteration of registered traveler and because business travelers take 

over 500 million domestic business trips a year in this country 

alone. 

But our surveys cite that moving through airport security is one 

of the largest pain points still to this day. PreCheck clearly offers 

travelers a risk-based intelligence—you know, intelligence-driven 

49 

aviation security that is safe, fast, and efficient. Time is money for 

business travelers, and inefficient procedures reduce business travel and a hassle factor that hurts the economy. We have found that 

TSA PreCheck not only improves the airport screening process, but 

the entire travel experience by a significant amount. 

However, the current practice of allowing non-TSA PreCheck 

members into the security lines continues to be voiced frequently 

as a concern by travelers enrolled in the program. It is our belief 

that this continued practice undermines the impetus to enroll, and 

calls into question the entire premise of the program, which is prescreening travelers through—who, through background checks, 

have been identified as safe before they arrive at the airport. 

We need to put an end to this practice. GBTA fully supports the 

work done by the committee to limit those not only cleared for 

PreCheck to be allowed in those lanes. GBTA is prepared to support new legislation to prohibit the practice. 

As we saw in the summer of 2016, TSA PreCheck cannot be the 

sole answer to long security lines. In GBTA’s opinion, accurate 

travel forecasts, well-thought-out policies, and solid analysis of historical data like our own business travel index are key to TSA’s 

ability to adequately staff checkpoints. 

Our most frequent findings show that U.S.-origin business for 

travel is expected to accelerate significantly in 2018, advancing 6.1 

percent followed by roughly 7 percent growth in 2019 and 2020. 

Business travel gains have not reached this level since 2011. But 

also in these findings is an unusually high impact of many global 

uncertainties. The Global Economic Policy Uncertainty Index, 

which began in 1997 has hit an all-time 20-year high. 

We are at a time of conflicting and sometimes seemingly contradictory views on how the business travel marketplace is 

trending and what the future holds. On one hand as lower corporate taxes are pushed forward and business regulations are 

rolled back, some would argue that business travel is healthy. 

But other underlying factors have decidedly more negative impact on the future of business travel, including trade policy renegotiation, terrorism, travel and immigration bans, sanctions, electronic bans, and geopolitical tensions. 

GBTA is concerned that this uncertainty along with on-going 

rhetoric and policies will send the message that the United States 

is closed for in-bound global business. This dampening of demand 

for the United States as a business travel destination could cause 

a lasting negative economic impact that is masked in the near term 

by offsetting economic policies. 

This began with the current administration’s first travel ban, 

which cost $185 million in business travel bookings in just 1 week. 

Then with a second, then a third ban followed which is awaiting 

ruling from the Supreme Court, driving further uncertainty. 

There is no question that uncertainty is bad for business travel 

and bad for our role in the global economy. When we looked at our 

uncertainty forecast last year, the impact that it was having was 

significant. We projected a loss of $1.3 billion in overall travel-related expenditures in the United States, which includes hotels, 

food, car rental, shopping, all the ancillary expenses. That included 

$250 million lost in spending from in-bound travelers from Europe 

50 

and the Middle East alone. Finally our new forecast coming out 

will be out in August, looking at not only last year’s total numbers, 

but the impact going forward. 

So looking forward, again we are really concerned about all of 

this, as it affects meetings and business travel. When you are looking at those—that planning—that business is planned 1 to 2 years 

out. We will only begin to see the impact of these decisions this 

year. 

So again, it goes without saying that GBTA strongly supports all 

of our efforts to keep the skies, borders, and country safe. We continue to be proponent for expanding proven security programs. I 

think a lot of the discussion that we have talked about here today 

so far and the questions coming forward—we have opportunities. 

I think there has been buy-in from TSA at the top, but not always the action we are looking for. So again, we have to find ways 

to look at the cumulative affect of all of these policies. Again, create 

the—change the rhetoric and the perception that United States is 

closed for business. 

GBTA stands ready to improve the travel process and to make 

sure that this becomes a reality. Again, we thank you again for the 

opportunity to be here today. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. McCormick follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF MICHAEL W. MCCORMICK

MAY 17, 2018 

Chairman Katko, Ranking Member Watson Coleman, and Members of the subcommittee: My name is Michael W. McCormick, and I am executive director and 

chief operating officer of the Global Business Travel Association—a role I have 

served in since 2009. Thank you for the opportunity to testify regarding business 

travelers’ perspective and perception on the TSA Checkpoints, the expedited traveler program PreCheck and the impact policy announcements and security management can have on business travel. 

The Global Business Travel Association (‘‘GBTA’’) is the world’s premier business 

travel and meetings trade organization headquartered in the Washington, DC area 

with operations on six continents. GBTA’s 9,000-plus members manage more than 

$345 billion of global business travel and meetings expenditures annually. GBTA 

delivers world-class education, events, research, advocacy, and media to a growing 

global network of more than 28,000 travel professionals and 125,000 active contacts. 

GBTA has 38 chapters and affiliates across this country. GBTA’s annual Convention in the United States is the must-attend event of the year for business travel. 

This August’s event in San Diego will welcome over 7,000 attendees from across the 

United States as well as over 50 countries. Last year’s event had an economic impact of $22.5 million on the city of Boston. This event and economic impact is a 

small sample size of the total impact of business travel in practice. Although we are 

a global organization, our roots are in our history here as we celebrate our 50th anniversary as a U.S.-led trade association headquartered in Virginia. 

U.S. ECONOMIC BENEFITS OF BUSINESS TRAVEL

In July 2017, GBTA released the ‘‘The U.S. Business Travel Economic Impact Report’’. This report as its name implies, shows the industry was responsible for about 

3 percent ($547 billion) of U.S. GDP in 2016. The business travel industry supports 

7.4 million jobs and generated $135 billion in Federal, State, and local taxes. Much 

of business travel’s contribution to the economy accrues directly to industries that 

serve business travelers, but their supply chain beneficiaries received an additional 

indirect contribution of $132 billion. 

Based on these numbers, it cannot be overstated how important travel is to the 

U.S. economy . . . or any economy. As we always say, ‘‘Business travel drives business growth’’. Companies invest in business travel to drive new business, create new 

jobs, and build shareholder value. But as the busy summer travel season ramps up, 

51 

GBTA is concerned past travel problems in screening as well as past statements and 

policies on foreign visitation will impact the rest of 2018 and beyond. 

TSA PRECHECK

The Nation’s businesses spent $424 billion to send travelers out on the road for 

514.4 million domestic business trips including roughly 144 million round-trip 

flights. Because of this mass of travelers, GBTA has made secure and efficient travel a key platform of GBTA’s legislative policy. GBTA has been a supporter of TSA 

PreCheck since its first iteration as Registered Traveler. This support stems from 

understanding the issues that impact business travel. GBTA surveys of business 

travelers consistently cite moving through airport security as one of the largest pain 

points. TSA PreCheck offers business travelers a risk-based, intelligence-driven 

aviation security that is safe, fast, and efficient. Time is money for business travelers, and inefficient procedures reduce business travel due to the ‘‘hassle factor’’ 

and hurt the economy. 

GBTA’s ‘‘Business Traveler Sentiment Index’’ profiles business travelers and our 

research shows TSA PreCheck enrollees are significantly more satisfied with air 

travel than those not enrolled. Two-thirds (66 percent) of travelers enrolled in TSA 

PreCheck are satisfied with getting through airport security, compared with just 47 

percent of business travelers not enrolled in the program. More striking is the impact the program has on the overall travel experience, 66 percent report satisfaction, 

compared to 54 percent for those not enrolled. 

MITIGATION STRATEGY

GBTA believes in TSA PreCheck and continues to work with Congress and TSA 

to expand its marketing opportunity to grow the population enrollment. GBTA believes increased marketing and expanded third-party enrollment are vital to TSA 

achieving its goal of 25 million enrollees. 

However, the current practice of allowing non-TSA PreCheck members into the 

security lines continues to be voiced frequently as a concern by travelers enrolled 

in the program. GBTA fully supports the work done by the committee to limit only 

those cleared for TSA PreCheck to be allowed in the lanes. And GBTA is prepared 

to support new legislation to prohibit this. 

GBTA understands TSA has concerns over the impact this restriction may have 

on the other screening lanes. However, it is GBTA’s belief that this continued practice undermines the impetus to enroll and calls into question the entire premise of 

the program, which is prescreening travelers who through background checks have 

been identified as ‘‘safe’’ before they arrive at the airport. It’s time to finally put 

an end to this practice, which confers all the benefits of PreCheck without requiring 

any of the burdens. 

While GBTA believes in the risk-based approach, as we saw in the Summer of 

2016, TSA PreCheck cannot be the sole answer to long security lines. In GBTA’s 

opinion, accurate travel numbers, well-thought-out policies and solid analysis of historical data and forecasts, like the ‘‘GBTA BTI© Outlook—Annual Global Report & 

Forecast’’ are key to TSA’s ability to adequately staff checkpoints. 

The BTI’s most recent findings show business travel spending is expected to accelerate significantly in 2018, advancing 6.1 percent, followed by roughly 7.0 percent 

growth in both 2019 and 2020. Business travel spending gains have not reached this 

level since 2011. Yet, also included in the findings was an unusually high impact 

of many global uncertainties. The Global Economic Policy Uncertainty Index, which 

began in 1997, has hit an all-time, 20-year high. 

52 

We are at a time of conflicting and sometimes seemingly contradictory views on 

how the business travel marketplace is trending—and what the future holds. On 

one hand, as lower corporate tax rates are pushed forward and business regulations 

are rolled back, some would argue that business travel is healthy. But other underlying factors have a decidedly more negative impact on the future of business travel 


h:\seals\115641.eps h:\seals\115642.eps
53 

including trade policy renegotiation, terrorism, travel and immigration bans, sanctions, electronics bans, and geopolitical tensions. 

IMPACT OF ADMINISTRATION POLICY AND RHETORIC ON TRAVEL

GBTA is concerned this uncertainty along with on-going rhetoric and policies will 

send the message that the United States is closed for global business. This dampening of the demand for the United States as a business travel destination could 

cause a lasting negative economic impact that is masked in the near term by offsetting economic policies. 

This began last year with the current administration’s first travel ban, which cost 

the United States $185 million in business travel bookings in 1 week. A second, 

then third travel ban followed, which is awaiting ruling from the Supreme Court, 

driving further uncertainty. There is no question that uncertainty is bad for business travel and bad for the global economy. 

In May 2017, GBTA developed an ‘‘uncertainty forecast’’ for 2017 showing the impact that mounting geopolitical uncertainty was having on the economy by using 

first-quarter ticketing data from the Airlines Reporting Corp. (ARC), publicly-available travel data, and GBTA’s economic research and models including the BTI. 

GBTA projected a loss of over $1.3 billion in overall travel-related expenditures in 

the United States in 2017 including hotels, food, rental cars, and shopping expenses 

that inbound travelers would have spent. That includes $250 million lost in spending from inbound business travelers from Europe and the Middle East. U.S. GDP 

was projected to take a nearly $300 million hit while potentially impacting more 

than 4,200 jobs along with $175 million in lost wages and a $70 million reduction 

in tax collections. Final 2017 numbers will be available in our annual Global Business Travel Index forecast due out in August 2018. 

The underlying concern is that this will have a significant long-term impact on 

the economy as companies begin to host meetings and events in competitive nonU.S. destinations. In March 2017, following the second Executive Order on travel, 

GBTA polled its U.S. and European membership. Nearly 4 in 10 (37 percent) U.S. 

business travel professionals expected some level of reduction in their company’s 

travel because of the revised Executive Order. Even more European travel professionals felt this way with 47 percent expecting some level of reduction in business 

travel for their company. Additionally, 17 percent of European travel professionals 

reported that their company has already canceled business travel to the United 

States because of the Executive Orders issued. 

Thirty-eight percent of European business travel professionals said their companies would be less willing to send business travelers to the United States in the future because of the Executive Order, and 45 percent indicated their company will 

be less willing to plan future meetings and events in the United States. With meetings and events typically planned 1 to 2 years out, we will only begin to see the 

impact of these decisions this year. 

The poll also revealed that when asked about top concerns regarding the immigration ban on your travelers, increased traveler harassment in general (41 percent), 

uncertainty regarding green card and approved visa credibility to enter the United 

States (34 percent), and harassment of U.S. travelers to and from the Middle East 

(34 percent) topped the list. 

It goes without saying that GBTA strongly supports all efforts keep our skies safe. 

GBTA continues to be a proponent for expanding proven security programs and developing new technology to facilitate information sharing among governments to ensure travelers are always vetted properly, making us all more safe and secure. Yet, 

it is the cumulative impact of anti-travel policies and rhetoric that leave the perception to many that the United States is closed for business. 

It is imperative that we reverse this tide of negative perception. As found in the 

GBTA economic study, a 1 percent decrease in business travel spending alone 

causes the U.S. economy to lose 74,000 jobs, $5.5 billion in GDP, $3.3 billion in 

wages, and $1.3 billion in taxes. 

GBTA stands ready to assist in improving the travel process and to remind all 

that perception can be reality. GBTA urges consideration of the important lasting 

impact of business travel and hopes policies will be enacted going forward that preserve both our National security and our economy for the future. 

Mr. KATKO. Thank you Mr. McCormick, appreciate your testimony. I appreciate the testimony of all four of you, and I am really 

glad that—that TSA is here to—to hear it all. I am not going to 

get into specifics, but if you could just briefly answer to me. 

54 

Could you just—each of you just quickly tell me—the concerns 

you have raised are very valid concerns. Some very good ideas, like 

merging Trusted Traveler and TSA and those types of things. 

Don’t have time to get into all of them, but how much interaction 

or how much—how should I say, meaningful interaction have you 

had with TSA in sharing your ideas with them? If you could just 

tell me briefly, each of you? 

Ms. HOWERTON. Excuse me, sure. We have shared our recommendations with TSA last November. We published a report 

called Transforming Security at the Airports. We actually have 

given this report to the administrator and many of the people that 

are over at TSA. 

Excuse me. In addition—excuse me. The ASAC Checkpoint of the 

Future Report that came to Congress embodies the same recommendations that I have posed here today. 

Mr. KATKO. OK, thank you. Ms. Pinkerton. 

Ms. PINKERTON. We work with TSA almost on a daily basis. We 

can’t say enough praise for Administrator Pekoske, Darby, and others on his team that have done an outstanding job post the summer of 2016, setting up that kind of regular communication and coordination. 

Now, I will say, some of the issues that we have talked about, 

some of these ideas, we have been talking to them about them for 

years. So—the coordination though is very good. 

Mr. KATKO. OK. Ms. Reiter. 

Ms. REITER. I would say the same thing as Sharon. The associations and airports communicate often, if not daily with the—with 

the TSA. It has been some of them for a long time in discussion, 

particularly PreCheck. 

Mr. KATKO. OK. Mr. McCormick. 

Mr. MCCORMICK. Yes, I would say the same. I mean the interaction is terrific, and again we get buy-in from, you know, the top 

down. But the reality is is that some of these areas we have to accelerate. Particularly the marketing of the programs to the corporations. 

It is—you know, it was mentioned in—in your testimony. But 

there is a huge opportunity with the corporations community. 

These are people who are already vetted, already—the corporation 

knows more about the travelers than TSA even needs to, to have 

them qualify for PreCheck. 

But it is—but the—the agency is maybe not the best at driving 

those programs, as to why we need the third-party enrollment, why 

we need to really aggressively go after the—the opportunities that 

are there in front of us. 

Mr. KATKO. OK. Well I—I commend TSA for making yourselves 

available and doing the things you are doing to interact with the— 

with the—the stakeholders. It is not an easy job you have, but I 

commend you for interacting with them. 

It is clear that since my time in as Chair that things have got 

a lot better at TSA. A lot of it is because you are listening, and that 

is—that is a good thing, so I commend you for that. Also, again 

looking at 2016 as a good example of that. Because there was a crisis at the travel times. We learned that field service directors may 

not be interacting with the airlines as much as they should. They 

55 

fixed that. They have—they have learned to open their gates a little bit sooner; they fixed that. 

They have learned to anticipate flows better and they fixed that. 

All those things are helping, and just keep going, because I think 

they are making a difference. But I want to—I want to still—you 

know talk more—a little bit more about PreCheck. 

It is really surprising to me why more airports do not have kiosks at the airport. It seems like such a basic, simple thing to do. 

You saw what happened in my airport, but I—you heard my statements earlier about what has happened there with enrollments. It 

has gone through the roof. Why can’t airports do it and what would 

be the impediment for them doing it? Any suggestions, anything 

you are—Ms. Reiter, yes? 

Ms. REITER. There had—there are quite a bit of restrictions that 

are put on the one company in what they need for infrastructure 

that is really difficult for the company to do, as well as some of the 

airports to get them the infrastructure that they need. So it is difficult for them to come into the airports. 

Mr. KATKO. When you say restrictions, who is causing these restrictions? The airports or is that the—— 

Ms. REITER. It is actually I think what TSA requires of the company to—to have to be able to get into the airport. 

Mr. KATKO. Can you give us some examples, just so I understand 

better? 

Ms. REITER. Like how thick the walls need to be and what kind 

of infrastructure they need and what kind of IT requirements they 

need. It is extremely difficult for them to get in. 

Mr. KATKO. OK, but do you have it at your airport? 

Ms. REITER. I do. 

Mr. KATKO. How do—how do you—how is it working? 

Ms. REITER. It is working great. it is working fine, yes. Yes, 

and—and we have increased PreCheck because of that. 

Mr. KATKO. Ever. Perhaps we should have a good discussion with 

TSA with the Chairman—with the administrator on how we can 

help maybe tweak that process and expedite it, because we really— 

we need to get them at airports. I haven’t heard anyone that has 

them at airports say it is not good. So what is—how do we expand 

to other airports? How do we incentive other airports to get there? 

Most—maybe we straighten out some of these things but what are 

some of the—is it reluctance at other airports to give up space or 

what is it? 

Ms. PINKERTON. I don’t think there is reluctance but I would just 

make a pitch again for mobile enrollment. I mean, this—we are— 

everybody is using their mobile and it wouldn’t require a heavy infrastructure investment. Again, I hear TSA talking about it. We 

just—we need to get it done. 

Mr. KATKO. OK. Anything else, Ms. Howerton. 

Ms. HOWERTON. I concur with both of those comments. 

Mr. KATKO. OK. 

Ms. REITER. Sir, there are other airports that have offered to actually put it in their credential centers, the smaller airports that 

have the staff and are willing to do that kind of as a third party 

that has been out there for years. So there are other opportunities. 

56 

Mr. KATKO. Yes, because it seems to me that the key to anticipating like Mr. McCormick said the increase in travel, I mean, 

those projections are 30 percent more air travel in the next decade 

or two, we have got to be ready for it, right. If we don’t have 

PreCheck and we don’t have ways to expedite the screening processes we are going to be in trouble. 

I think that K–9’s is a good, maybe an intermediate way to do 

it. But that is definitely a way to do it I think. But it is not a foolproof way. It is not the best way if you don’t know the traveler. I 

mean if you know the traveler PreCheck is the best way, I think, 

and we have got to really push that. 

So, we should spend more time and I would like to—if there is 

any other ideas you have about PreCheck, I definitely want to hear 

from you because to me it is one of the keys. If we can get to that 

25 million I think we are going to have a dramatically different 

landscape at airports. 

It really troubles me why you have 1-hour waits. I know you are 

a popular airport, you are one of the most popular in the country 

but—and that is to your credit, but is there something we are missing as to why those wait times are being caused? 

Ms. REITER. I think there has been a change in how the use of 

dogs is—how long they can be used that probably should be discussed as well down the line. I think there is also some discussion 

about the attrition rate at our airport. We are one of the airports 

that the attrition rate is extremely high. 

Thank goodness, the—TSA is working with us on that that. We 

have great collaboration with them. So, thank you Mr. Lajoye. 

He—they are working from top down on that. So, we are struggling 

with that as well. So and just we are really a peak airport but we 

are really struggling between K–9s and attrition. It is tough. 

Mr. KATKO. All right. I thank you very much. I just—keep your 

input coming. I mean, obviously one of the reasons we had this 

hearing today is because I heard from you about the concerns 

about the wait times and we have got to—I think we really need 

to put our heads together, TSA and all of us in the industry to figure out how the best way to market this. 

You gave some good ideas and we are going to go back and talk 

about them and I am always willing to legislate. So, we will see 

what we can do here. With that, I will recognize Mrs. Watson Coleman for 5 minutes of questions. 

Ms. WATSON COLEMAN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am certain 

you heard a little bit of my opening statement as it relates to what 

is happening with international travel and I would like to pursue 

that, particularly with Mr. McCormick and Ms. Howerton. 

The data shows that the sharpest declines in inbound international visits came direct—came directly following President’s 

first two travel bans. There has also been a sharp decline in tourists coming from Mexico which many have speculated is a direct 

consequence of the President’s plan to build a wall along the Southern Border. 

I have a series of questions in support of this premise, and my 

first question is what message do you believe that the President’s 

policies and rhetoric are sending to the international visitors, Ms. 

Howerton and Mr. McCormick? If any. 

57 

Mr. MCCORMICK. Yes, I think, so last year when the second Executive Order was put out in March, we polled our European membership and 38 percent of business travel professionals said their 

companies would be less willing to send business travelers to the 

United States and 45 percent said they would be less willing to 

plan future meetings and events in the United States. 

Ms. WATSON COLEMAN. Can you translate that into money? 

Mr. MCCORMICK. Yes, the impact there, I mean, we were esti- mating last year the impact could have over, like a $1.3 billion impact on the—on travel expenditures and related expenditures here 

in the United States. The problem is, is that when you are talking 

about this, particularly group and meeting travels, it is planned, 

again, 1 to 2 years out. 

So we are not even going to begin to see the impact of those 

changes until now and into next year. So again that rhetoric is difficult, right, because just factually it has an impact on perception 

about doing business. In a global economy, again, companies have 

options. 

They don’t have to come here for that type of travel. They can 

go anywhere else. So, that does create a problem for us as an industry. 

Ms. WATSON COLEMAN. OK. Thank you. Ms. Howerton, do you 

have anything to add to the Trump slump question? 

Ms. HOWERTON. Yes, I do, thank you very much. Actually the 

U.S. market share in international travel has been sliding since 

2015. So it is not new to this administration. That being said, the 

fact that there is not a welcoming message and what we are hearing through all of the other issues for international visitation is 

hurtful to continuing an incline in international travel. 

We do need the President’s help. It is pretty clear. Robust travel 

is both compatible with his priorities for strong security and it is 

critical to the priority to grow jobs. So we are hopeful that we will 

see an increase once we get some more movement underfoot for 

positive messaging. 

Ms. WATSON COLEMAN. So do you think we are going to—well, 

OK. So you believe that this is related to some positive messaging. 

Has your industry been able to do anything to sort-of express this 

concern to the parties or party principally responsible for the depression of international travel because of the rhetoric? Have you 

all like sought meetings with those entities or individuals who 

would—who are responsible for this? 

Ms. HOWERTON. We actually are a member of a U.S. travel coalition, Visit U.S. Travel Coalition, and it is a coalition of many members both members that are with in the U.S. travel footprint of 

membership and organizations that are outside of it. The primary 

purpose of this organization is to work with the administration on 

ways we can increase international travel, ways we can message it, 

ways we can impact international visitors coming here and the jobs 

that international travel creates. 

Ms. WATSON COLEMAN. So have you specifically been able to 

communicate to anybody in the administration representing the interests of this President or even the President himself the concerns 

that have been raised by the rhetoric, the negative rhetoric and 

how it has impacted possibly people coming from Mexico and peoVerDate Mar 15 2010 12:29 Nov 01, 2018 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00061 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 H:\115TH CONGRESS\18TP0517\18TP0517.TXT HEATH
58 

ple coming from other places around the world. Have you, to your 

knowledge, Ms. Howerton or you to your knowledge, Mr. McCormick? 

Ms. HOWERTON. We have had meetings with the—with administration officials, yes we have. 

Ms. WATSON COLEMAN. Have they recognized the possibility of 

this being a problem and seeking to a course correction here? As 

if anybody has any control over the President’s mouth. 

Ms. HOWERTON. They had listened intently. 

Ms. WATSON COLEMAN. Thank you. Mr. McCormick, do you have 

anything to share on it? 

Mr. MCCORMICK. No, I think on that front—I mean, again, we 

have also met with the administration and every—and—and anyone that will meet and listen, because of the importance of this 

issue. 

I mean it is critical. This business travel drives the economy, and 

I think there is a—there is an understand that—of that, but I 

think, again, we have a lot more work to do to have that fully embraced in a way that affects the way work is done. 

Ms. WATSON COLEMAN. While I have several more questions, I 

am going to close with this question. Like I know this is is going— 

this is impacting jobs, impacting spending, impacting our economy 

negatively. 

What is it that you think Congress can do to help to counteract 

the Trump slump’s impact on incoming international travel? I 

would be interested in knowing, and with the answer to that question, Ms. Howerton, Mr. McCormick or anybody else that is at the 

witness table would like to respond to that, I would yield back after 

that. 

Mr. MCCORMICK. Well, I would just say that I think you are 

doing it. I mean this is a perfect example of very good bipartisan 

efforts to address the issues that are affecting travel and to give 

us the forum to deliver the message. 

I mean I think that we could do more together, I think to have 

those meetings and to impress upon everybody about this importance, again, we are all on the same side on this issue. I mean this 

is—this is something that I don’t think there is anything we are 

saying here that you would have an argument against. The tactics 

of the issue, right, and the enforcement is the issue. 

Ms. WATSON COLEMAN. But you know, last comment. 

Mr. KATKO. That is fine. 

Ms. WATSON COLEMAN. While we are focusing now on international travel coming to us, there is also a question about whether 

or not we as Americans, businesses, whatever, are reluctant to go 

to do international travel, because for fear that we are not liked 

anymore as a result of this kind of rhetoric. 

So something—this whole area is something that we need to explore a little bit close—more closely in the upcoming future. 

With that. 

Mr. MCCORMICK. Well again, I mean we would welcome the dialog because companies have a bigger obligation in terms of duty of 

care and risk management. We are sending travelers now all over 

the world to destinations to do business and to grow business. 

59 

I mean companies—every company is global these days, every 

company has business, is looking for new business anywhere in the 

world. So I mean the—we do have an obligation, we have an obligation as a country, right, to address the issues and to give companies that are driving our economy the support they need. 

Ms. WATSON COLEMAN. As our ally base seems to be shrinking, 

we need to be very careful preserving and protecting our opportunities internationally. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, I yield back. 

Mr. KATKO. Thank you, Mrs. Watson Coleman, and I thank all 

of you for you testimony here today, it has been very helpful and 

very thought-provoking and my poor staff is going to get tortured 

with a lot of assignments now from—because of that. 

But I do—I do understand and I appreciate the problem and I 

appreciate the much better interaction with the industry than 

there has been, and I commend all of you at TSA for that. 

Thank all of you for keeping with it, because it is really important, and the more we hear from you the more we know what to 

do. So I thank you for that very much. Before we wrap up, I just 

want to let you know that we have the PreCheck bill coming and 

that will be coming in the next week or so. 

You sure? OK, week or so. 

Yes. Those are my bosses back here. But they—we will be getting 

that out, and it is not to torture TSA, it is just to make sure we 

make it clear that PreCheck means PreCheck. But there are also 

things we can do to help exploit the program, and I think we can— 

I think the—the merger of—of the two systems is a good idea, and 

some of the other things that we can do. 

So we thank you for that as well, and with that, I want to thank 

all the Members for your testimony. Members of the committee 

may have some additional questions for the record, and witnesses 

are—and we will ask you to respond to those in writing. 

Pursuant to committee rule VII(D), the hearing record will remain open for 10 days. Without objection, the committee stands adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 11:16 a.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.] 

(61) 

A P P E N D I X 

QUESTIONS FROM HONORABLE BONNIE WATSON COLEMAN FOR DARBY LAJOYE

Question 1a. TSA has proposed addressing concerns regarding unvetted passengers going through PreCheck screening by introducing a new lane at checkpoints 

that would fall between PreCheck and standard lanes. 

How will TSA accomplish this when there is already a shortage of lanes and staffing resources at most airports? 

Question 1b. Will creating more types of lanes exacerbate the challenges of making sure each lane is available and being fully utilized? 

Answer. As TSA improves its ability to differentiate passengers through enhanced 

technology and vetting, it will be able to adjust procedures based on the determined 

risk. While still in the planning phase, the intent is for such adjustments to increase 

checkpoint efficiency, while ensuring that passengers still receive the appropriate 

level of screening based on the identified risk level. 

Additional segmentation of passengers has the possibility of creating operational 

challenges. Recognizing such, TSA is exploring different options to assess operational feasibility. How changes will impact operations, especially during lower volume periods and at smaller checkpoints, will be key takeaways from any option explored. 

Question 2a. Administrator Pekoske has stated his intent to move toward more 

tailored screening of the flying public. Under his proposed vision, more and more 

levels of screening would exist, and each passenger would be provided a level of 

screening based on the risk TSA believes they present. 

How do you intend to avoid setting up a system that essentially benefits wealthy 

travelers who are able to pay for Trusted Traveler Program enrollments while penalizing less wealthy travelers? 

Question 2b. What would you say to those who have expressed concerns that this 

approach would incentivize people to offer more and more information about themselves to the Government and penalize people who care about their privacy and civil 

liberties? 

Answer. TSA strives to continuously improve passenger security screening while 

maintaining high levels of security and privacy protections. TSA employs a riskbased approach that enables it to move away from ‘‘one-size-fits-all’’ passenger security screening model and instead focus agency resources and efforts more effectively 

on those who pose greater or unknown risk. TSA established TSA PreCheck for expedited screening of low-risk passengers at airport checkpoints across the country 

beginning in 2011 as part of this risk-based security approach. 

Since then, TSA has continually evolved its processes to differentiate passenger 

screening protocols, adjusting its security measures to better address changing security and threat environments while balancing available resources, airport-specific 

constraints, and planned travel volumes. TSA’s planned changes are a continuation 

of its goal to screen passengers at a level commensurate to their level of assessed 

known or unknown risk. 

There are multiple avenues for individuals to be deemed eligible for TSA expedited screening, ranging from direct enrollment in a DHS Trusted Traveler Program; being a member of an approved, pre-vetted group such as active-duty military; or canine-expedited screening on a flight-by-flight basis. TSA is looking to further differentiate screening measures within its pool of identified low-risk travelers 

based on the level of prescreening and information available to TSA to evaluate the 

degree of passenger risk. The additional information needed is often information 

like mailing address which passengers already provide to the airlines. By selecting 

to share that basic information with TSA, passengers may be able to gain access 

to expedited screening without any cost. 

Participation in a DHS Trusted Traveler Program, such as the TSA PreCheck Application program, is voluntary. TSA must be able to charge fees in order to cover 

62 

the costs for performing the Trusted Traveler vetting. TSA consistently evaluates 

the pricing models for the TSA PreCheck Application Program to ensure it is accessible for the general public. Currently, the $85 fee for a 5-year enrollment with the 

TSA PreCheck Application Program equates to $17 per year, or less than $5 per trip 

for travelers who fly at least four times per year. The pricing structure is much 

lower than similar programs, and the application fees that are collected are required 

to maintain the enrollment and vetting operations, and overall management of the 

program. TSA will continue to look for ways to lower the application fees for this 

and other programs, through formal fee-analysis. 

Safeguarding sensitive personal information and ensuring the protection of civil 

liberties are paramount to the overall success of any DHS Trusted Traveler Program. Passengers are all required to submit minimum information necessary for 

TSA to satisfy statutory requirements to identify those individuals on a watch list 

that may pose a threat to transportation and National security. Individuals willing 

to voluntarily provide additional information may apply for a DHS Trusted Traveler 

Program in order to validate identities and conduct security threat assessments to 

evaluate the degree of risk posed by that individual to the aviation transportation 

system. Individual application information is carefully handled and safeguarded. 

Question 3a. TSA will need to continue to increase enrollments in PreCheck to 

ensure the program’s success. 

Please describe in detail any current or forthcoming campaigns for increasing 

PreCheck enrollment. 

Answer. In 2017, TSA studied its customers and the factors that led them to enroll in the TSA PreCheck Application Program. TSA is leveraging the findings to 

implement a 5-year Enrollment Growth Strategy, which includes initiatives to boost 

enrollment by increasing program convenience and accessibility. TSA’s enrollment 

contractor plays an important role in growing enrollment and has been piloting 

ways to streamline enrollment options. Information used in the development of the 

strategy is acquisition sensitive, and will be available to Members once the enrollment services contract is awarded. The current enrollment contract is in the final 

stages of a Request for Proposal process and with the new contract we expect additional functionality and capabilities for enrollment and marketing. 

With the first wave of TSA PreCheck Application Program membership expirations occurring this fall, TSA is working hard to maintain existing enrollment levels. 

To do so, TSA has designed a renewal process that will not require an in-person 

visit for existing enrollees, allowing for a seamless renewal experience that still includes a robust threat assessment. In addition to the sustainment initiatives, TSA 

will support the following activities aimed at increasing enrollments: 

Low-Risk Vetted Populations.—An effort created to take existing populations that 

go through a similar vetting process to TSA PreCheck (i.e., Federal Employees) and 

provide those individuals the ability to opt-in to TSA PreCheck. 

Marketing.—TSA PreCheck marketing efforts focus on promoting the brand and 

the experience of TSA PreCheck as well as increasing customer knowledge and 

awareness of the program. TSA PreCheck will launch an advertising campaign in 

Summer–Fall of 2018 to accelerate enrollments of the frequent traveler customer 

segment (3–15 round trips per year) in the top 7–15 U.S. geographical markets. In 

addition, TSA will continue to engage with TSA PreCheck partners to include the 

53 airlines and dozens of private-sector businesses in the hotel, credit card, travel 

management, rental car, association, and destination marketing industries. TSA 

PreCheck partner relationships drive high-value by promoting the brand and reaching target customer segments. 

Question 3b. What are the physical requirements for an airport to add a PreCheck 

enrollment kiosk, and how is TSA working to make this process easier and more 

accessible? 

Answer. TSA is testing portable enrollment solutions that can be utilized in airports and other types of locations/events, making enrollment easier and more accessible. These portable solutions require an in-person interaction with TSA PreCheck 

applicants and a Trusted Enrollment Agent to verify identity and collect biometrics 

from that verified individual, as TSA security threat assessments rely on accurate 

identity and biometrics collection. Physical privacy requirements are necessary for 

enrollment kiosks, such as physical space/barriers to ensure there is no visual or 

audible unauthorized disclosure of Personally Identifiable Information (PII). In addition to privacy requirements, secure internet connections and power sources are also 

required to operate enrollment equipment, to ensure data is not stored on the endpoint device. Additionally, there are requirements to lock down the enrollment 

equipment/kiosk and store it safely when not in use. 

63 

Question 3c. What current barriers exist that prevent the merging of TSA and 

CBP Trusted Traveler programs and the establishment of co-located enrollment centers? 

Answer. Identifying opportunities for collaboration and increased efficiencies between TSA and CBP Trusted Traveler Programs has been an important focus for 

both organizations over the last 6 months. A working-level group of representatives 

from both organizations meet on a monthly basis to better understand overlaps and 

potential points of collaboration. Additionally, the group has identified several areas 

that will need further assessment in order to further integrate the two Trusted 

Traveler Programs. The working group continues to strive toward merging the programs as they work through each of the areas detailed below. 

Enrollment Operations.—While both CBP and TSA Trusted Traveler Programs 

work to identify potential threats to transportation and National security, as a law 

enforcement organization with enforcement authority over a broad range of immigration and customs laws, CBP must conduct additional steps in its enrollment 

process that are not required for the TSA process. These steps include an in-person 

interview with a CBP officer. Additionally, TSA enrollment centers are staffed entirely by contactors, with adjudication and final determination of eligibility made by 

TSA employees. CBP instead requires CBP officers to staff the entire enrollment 

process, resulting in differences in labor costs. The working group has identified potential enrollment process solutions that meet these CBP requirements. 

Information Technology Infrastructure.—Both components own enrollment IT infrastructure, which the fee-funded Trusted Traveler Programs support, specifically 

$85 for TSA PreCheck Application Program and $100 for CBP Global Entry. Currently, both TSA and CBP are evaluating the creation of a single DHS on-line portal 

to support Trusted Traveler Programs, including the potential to facilitate the enrollment of some Global Entry applicants at TSA enrollment centers. The Information Technology (IT) system infrastructures of both programs support more than 30 

other vetted populations. For example, the IT system that supports TSA PreCheck 

also supports the Hazard Material Endorsements Program, Aviation Workers Programs, Transportation Workers Programs, and others, which is a factor that needs 

to be considered if merging these systems. 

Populations Served.—CBP applicants must hold a passport, which TSA does not 

require as part of its enrollment program. Additionally, TSA PreCheck applicants 

must be U.S. citizens or legal permanent residents, whereas CBP allows applications from citizens from additional approved countries. The differences in the populations served by these two Trusted Traveler Programs will need to be addressed. 

Question 4a. We often hear about how TSA meets its wait time standards for 99 

percent of passengers. However, this was true even in 2016 when many passengers 

were waiting in lines for hours. I understand the threshold for reporting long lines 

is 30 minutes for standard lanes and 15 minutes for PreCheck lanes. 

How did TSA develop its standards for reporting wait times? 

Question 4b. Why did the standards change from 20 minutes for standard lanes 

and 10 minutes for PreCheck lanes? 

Question 4c. How does TSA measure wait times? 

Question 4d. How can TSA refine its wait time data measurements to provide a 

better overall picture of how operations are functioning? 

Answer. TSA maintains a standard target of 20 minutes for standard lanes and 

10 minutes for TSA PreCheck lanes. TSA requires all Federal Security Directors 

(FSDs) to report to the TSA Airport Operations Center (AOC) when wait times exceed 30 minutes in standard or 15 minutes in TSA PreCheck lanes. The report includes the perceived cause of the wait time and the mitigation strategy. 

The AOC reporting requirements were developed to provide TSA leadership and 

stakeholders situational awareness. The threshold went through several iterations 

to reach 30 minutes for standard lanes. Initially, the threshold for reporting standard lanes was 45 minutes. This was revised to 40 minutes and then 30 minutes in 

September 2016. At 30 minutes, the appropriate number and severity of events is 

reported to leadership and TSA is currently better-positioned to address the issue 

and limit the impact on passengers and stakeholders than in years past. The 15- 

minute threshold for TSA PreCheck has remained the same. 

TSA has an operational directive which details the procedures for measuring wait 

times. Specifically, wait times are measured in actual time, using a verifiable system such as wait time cards, closed circuit television (CCTV) monitoring, or other 

confirmable methods. Wait times are measured from the end of the queue to the 

walk-through metal detectors or Advanced Imaging Technology units. TSA is assessing how measurements could be improved through automation in order to provide 

real-time data to TSA officials and stakeholders. 

64 

QUESTIONS FROM RANKING MEMBER WATSON COLEMAN FOR WILLIAM RUSSELL

Question 1a. GAO recently completed a study of TSA’s model for allocating staff 

across airport checkpoints. 

Is TSA’s allocation model based on the number of officers it has funding for or 

the number of officers TSA really needs to operate? 

Answer. The Transportation Security Administration (TSA) uses a resource allocation plan to allocate staff across airports. According to TSA officials, TSA identifies 

the number of transportation security officers (TSO) authorized by the agency’s 

budget and uses this number as a constraint when running the model to determine 

the allocation of TSOs across airports. 

Question 1b. What would be the benefits of having a model that is not constrained 

by budget limitations? 

Answer. According to TSA officials, the agency has reached its budget cap for the 

number of TSOs that the agency can afford to employ. In addition, officials told us 

they have conducted an analysis of the ideal number of TSOs needed to staff airports using its staffing model—unconstrained by budget limitations—and that the 

model produces a number of officers greater than the number TSA can afford given 

its current budget. We believe that the results of the unconstrained model could be 

compared to the results of the constrained model to help TSA determine the actual 

gap in staffing and inform the allocation of TSOs across airports by identifying 

those airports with the largest gaps. 

QUESTIONS FROM RANKING MEMBER WATSON COLEMAN FOR WENDY REITER

Question 1a. One of the major issues TSA faces in addressing increasing passenger volumes is a lack of space at many airports. TSA simply does not have the 

room to install additional lanes. 

How are airports addressing this issue, both in the short term and long term? 

Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication. 

Question 1b. How well does TSA communicate its real estate needs to airports? 

Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication. 

Question 2. In your testimony you mentioned that TSA hiring struggles to keep 

pace with the attrition of TSA officers to the higher-paying jobs that your region’s 

economy is creating. 

What are some steps that TSA can take to address such attrition challenges in 

your region and others? 

Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication. 

QUESTIONS FROM RANKING MEMBER WATSON COLEMAN FOR MICHAEL W. 

MCCORMICK

Question 1. Under this administration, we have seen a lot of uncertainty regarding security and regulatory policies, as the President seems to change his mind on 

policies day to day, and many of his decisions get held up in court. 

How does policy uncertainty affect business travelers and the travel industry? 

Answer. Business planning in an environment with turmoil and unpredictable 

change is difficult. Business leaders would much rather have certainty and predictability so that they can allocate capital and plan business appropriately for the long 

term. In response to the travel bans, GBTA developed an ‘‘uncertainty forecast’’ released in May 2017 showing the impact that mounting geopolitical uncertainty was 

having on the economy. The forecast was based upon airline ticketing data, publicly 

available travel data and GBTA’s economic research and modeling. This included 

our Global BTI—GBTA’s annual business travel forecast and outlook and the Global 

Economic Policy Uncertainty Index, which began in 1997, and hit an all-time, 20- 

year high in uncertainty this past year. 

In its ‘‘uncertainty forecast’’, GBTA projected a loss of over $1.3 billion in overall 

travel-related expenditures in the United States in 2017 including hotels, food, rental cars, and shopping expenses that inbound travelers would have spent. That includes $250 million lost in spending from inbound business travelers from Europe 

and the Middle East. U.S. GDP was projected to take a nearly $300 million hit 

while potentially impacting more than 4,200 jobs along with $175 million in lost 

wages and a $70 million reduction in tax collections. Final 2017 numbers will be 

available in our annual Global Business Travel Index forecast due out in August 

2018. The underlying concern is that this will have a significant long-term impact 

on the economy as companies begin to host meetings and events in competitive nonU.S. destinations. 

Question 2a. You testified to how President Trump is driving a downturn in international travel to the United States. 

65 

Are decreases in visits to the United States occurring primarily among visitors 

from certain countries and regions? Which ones? 

Question 2b. Do you believe there is a correlation between President Trump’s 

statements and policies and the nationalities of travelers who are visiting the 

United States less? For example, are travelers from Mexico or majority-Muslim 

countries visiting the United States less? 

Answer. GBTA is unable to specifically address these questions since our survey 

does not directly measure decreases in visits to the United States—it measures sentiment and anticipated impact. 

However, GBTA conducted a lightning poll of its U.S. and European members this 

June revealing 62 percent of U.S. travel buyers believe this administration is having 

a negative impact on business travel. Additionally, 38 percent of European travel 

buyers say their willingness to plan meetings and events in the United States has 

decreased because of the administration’s Executive Orders and a similar number 

(39 percent) say the administration’s policies and messaging on travel and immigration have negatively impacted their company’s willingness to plan meetings and 

events in the United States. 

Question 3a. In your role as the GBTA Executive Director and COO, you have 

published several blog posts on business travel and the negative impact the Trump 

administration’s policies have had. In a January 2018 post, you warn of the ‘‘economic consequences of continuing down a path of discouraging travel and portraying 

the United States as an unwelcoming destination.’’ 

Do you believe that the current perception that the administration’s anti-international travel policies have created is reversible, and if so, how could the administration go about reversing it? 

Answer. When policies are introduced without consulting stakeholders and presented without warning, it causes further damage to the United States as a destination for foreign travel. However, it is not irreparable. The U.S. economy remains 

strong and is an attractive place for business. The President comes from the hospitality industry and should understand the importance travel has on the economy. 

It remains unclear if his past experiences will change the administration’s stance, 

however. 

Question 3b. In the absence of a change of course from the administration, how 

can Congress and travel industry stakeholders assuage the concerns of international 

travelers caused by the administration? 

Answer. Continue to expand the Visa Waiver Program and to include all E.U. 

country members where possible while maintaining high security standards. 

Implement additional Trusted Traveler reciprocal agreements with countries 

where possible. 

DHS should conduct regular collection and analyzation of traveler feedback data. 

This information should be available to the partner organizations such as GBTA. 

It should also be used as the basis for developing best practices for all relevant 

agencies. 

Encourage relevant agencies to find more areas of cooperation to pool resources 

and intelligence. 

Congress can work closer together in a bi-partisan fashion to encourage the White 

House to rethink protectionist policies that impact travelers and businesses alike. 

Æ