TSA has various processes for receiving and addressing air passenger complaints about the screening systems, procedures, and personnel at airport security checkpoints. Specifically, several TSA headquarters units and local TSA airport staff have responsibility and processes for receiving and addressing these complaints, and, if necessary, referring these complaints to other TSA offices for resolution. Figure 1 depicts the four primary TSA headquarters units and the local TSA airport staff who are responsible for receiving and addressing air passenger screening complaints. As highlighted in figure 1, the TSA Contact Center (TCC) receives, documents, and helps resolve screening complaints that air passengers make by telephone and e-mail. The TCC is TSA’s primary point of contact for collecting, documenting, and responding to public questions, concerns, or complaints regarding TSA security policies, procedures, and programs; reports and claims of lost, stolen, or damaged items; and employment issues. These officials include Lead and Supervisory Transportation Security Officers as well as Transportation Security Managers. At SPP airports, they include supervisory contractor officials. FSDs and Assistant Federal Security Directors are responsible for overseeing TSA security programs at all commercial airports. According to the Assistant Administrator of TSA’s Office of Civil Rights & Liberties, Ombudsman and Traveler Engagement, the agency is working on an initiative under which an unspecified number of TSA staff will receive training as “passenger advocates” and begin working in this capacity to address air passenger complaints at security checkpoints by January 2013. screener staff at other commercial airports. Customer Support Managers work in conjunction with other FSD staff to resolve customer complaints and communicate the status and resolution of complaints to air passengers. They are also responsible for ensuring security procedures and practices are consistently and effectively communicated to air passengers, to the extent permitted by law and regulation. TSA has an operations directive that specifies roles, responsibilities, and time frames for resolving and responding to screening complaints that air passengers submit to the TCC and FSD staff. This directive does not apply to complaints received through other mechanisms, as we discuss later in this report. The agency has also given TSA headquarters units and FSDs discretion in addressing these complaints at airports under their jurisdiction, according to TSA officials. This operations directive provides instructions for processing public inquiries, including air passenger screening complaints, received by the TCC and FSD staff. The directive indicates that inquiries received by the TCC will be answered by the TCC or will be forwarded to the appropriate FSD staff for response, and that inquiries received by FSD staff will be answered by FSD staff or will be forwarded to the TCC for response. In addition, the operations directive provides several time frames for responding to complaints. For example, TSA should respond within 48 hours for e-mail inquiries addressed by the TCC, and within 72 hours for telephone inquiries addressed by the TCC. Overall, upon receiving a complaint, TSA headquarters units and local TSA airport staff may address the complaint directly or refer it to other offices for review and resolution after determining which one has the necessary expertise and knowledge to address the alleged incident. For example, according to TSA officials, if an air passenger submits the complaint through the TCC, TCC staff attempt to resolve it by providing a response to the air passenger using pertinent template language that explains TSA policy and screening procedures. Alternatively, the TCC may refer screening complaints for resolution to other TSA headquarters offices, depending on the specific allegation. For example, complaints alleging discrimination on the basis of a disability or medical condition are referred to the Disability Branch. Also, the TCC may forward complaints about customer service to the customer service representative at the airport identified in the complaint for investigation and resolution. Alternatively, if an air passenger submits a complaint directly to TSA staff at the airport, it is the responsibility of these staff members to investigate and resolve the complaint or, if necessary, refer it to TSA units at headquarters, such as the Disability Branch. For example, according to TSA officials, if an air passenger makes a complaint in person at the checkpoint, TSA supervisors and managers are to attempt to resolve the complaint at the checkpoint before the situation escalates. Regardless of whether a complaint is initially received by a TSA headquarters unit or at the airport at which the incident took place, according to TSA officials, local TSA airport officials generally conduct most follow-up investigations since they are well placed to collect additional airport-specific information and interview local staff. However, specific actions taken to investigate and resolve complaints vary by airport. For example, customer service representatives may be involved in reviewing screening complaints, obtaining additional information from the air passengers to determine when and where the incident took place, and reviewing video footage of the incident to help identify additional details of the incident, such as the identity of the screener(s) who may have been involved in the incident and what had actually happened during the incident. If the situation warrants it, the customer service representative may forward the complaint as well as the video footage to the TSA screening supervisor or manager for additional review and action. The supervisor or manager may review the video footage and obtain a statement from the screener to determine what happened during the incident and the extent to which the screener may have been at fault—for example, whether the screener violated TSA standard operating procedures, or behaved unprofessionally or inappropriately toward the air passenger. Depending on the nature and severity of the allegation, TSA airport staff may also elevate the complaint and evidence to the airport’s Assistant Federal Security Director (AFSD) for Screening or to TSA headquarters units, such as the Disability Branch or the Office of Inspections, for formal investigation. If the investigation were to find fault with the screener, the screener’s supervisor or manager is to determine the corrective action to be taken. Corrective actions specified in TSA’s guidance range from mandating the screener to take additional training to correct the behavior to terminating the screener’s employment for multiple repeat offenses or single egregious actions, such as theft of air passenger property. Following the outcome of the investigation and any resulting corrective actions, the TSA headquarters unit or the FSD or his/her staff, such as a customer service representative, is to communicate the status of the resolution to the air passenger—such as by reiterating that TSA procedures were followed or by issuing an apology and informing the air passenger that corrective actions were taken. TSA’s five centralized mechanisms for receiving air passenger screening complaints provide the agency with a significant amount of information it can use to monitor or enhance screening operations. However, TSA does not have agencywide policy, consistent processes, or an agency focal point to guide the receipt of these complaints or to use complaint information to inform management about the nature and extent of the screening complaints to help improve screening operations and customer service. TSA receives and documents screening complaints that air passengers submit through four headquarters units—the TCC, the Executive Secretariat, the Multicultural Branch, and the Disability Branch—as well as the Talk to TSA web-based feedback mechanism, which e-mails the screening complaint information directly to designated TSA airport staff. As shown in figure 3, the number of complaints submitted through these mechanisms fluctuated somewhat from October 2009 through June 2012. The major exception was a very large increase in the number of complaints submitted to three mechanisms in November and December 2010, which may be attributed to several factors, including a November 2010 public opt-out campaign reported by the media to protest the use of Advanced Imaging Technology and enhanced pat-down procedures for screening air passengers. The volume of complaints that TSA received through each of its five main mechanisms varied from October 2009 through June 2012. Also, because these mechanisms use different categories for screening complaints and have different capabilities for data analysis, we were not able to combine the data from these mechanisms to discuss overall patterns and trends in volume or categories of complaints. A discussion of complaint information in each mechanism follows. The TCC received the bulk of the air passenger screening complaints that the agency documented during this time period. Using TCC data, TSA has reported that it receives about 750,000 public inquiries annually through the TCC and that 8 percent of these inquiries involve air passenger complaints (including complaints about screening). As noted below, however, this information does not include complaint data from other TSA complaint mechanisms. Specifically, the TCC received a total of 39,616 screening complaints that air passengers submitted by e-mail and telephone from October 2009 through June 2012. The TCC divides screening complaints into seven main categories, five having multiple subcategories. Figure 4 shows the total numbers of screening complaints by the seven main TCC categories, such as 17,153 complaints about pat- down procedures. Figure 5 depicts the numbers of screening complaints that the TCC received from October 2009 through June 2012 by the four main TCC categories having the most complaints. As shown in figure 5, the numbers of screening complaints in these four categories remained relatively stable over this period. The major exception was a very large increase in the number of complaints about pat-down procedures in November and December 2010 and continuing periods of a relatively higher level of pat- down complaints through September 2011. As mentioned before, this increase in complaints may be attributed to several factors, including the November 2010 public opt-out campaign reported by the media to protest the use of Advanced Imaging Technology and enhanced pat-down procedures for screening air passengers. The Office of the Executive Secretariat received 4,011 complaints that air passengers submitted by mail. For instance, these complaints include screening complaints related to, among other issues, Advanced Imaging Technology and enhanced pat-down procedures. The Multicultural Branch received 2,899 written screening complaints alleging violations of civil rights and civil liberties, 469 of which it processed as cases.