Wednesday, November 9, 2011

TSA Pre✓™ Pilot Expanding To Three More Airports

TSA Precheck Logo. *** Update 12/6/2011 - Just announced! United Airlines will be the third airline participating in the program in the near future. ***

Today, TSA Administrator John S. Pistole announced that three airports will be added to the TSA Pre✓™ pilot. This limited pilot will help TSA evaluate measures designed to enhance security by placing more focus on pre-screening individuals prior to flying in order to expedite their travel experience.

Those airports are: Los Angeles International Airport (LAX),  Las Vegas - McCarran International Airport (LAS), and Minneapolis-Saint Paul International Airport (MSP).
· LAS will come on board in December for pilot participants traveling on both Delta and American Airlines
· LAX will also come on board in early 2012 for pilot participants traveling on American Airlines
· MSP will come on board in early 2012 for pilot participants traveling on Delta Air Lines
This will be very welcome news not only to travelers at these airports, but to the many TSA Pre✓™ fans and supporters we’ve gained through the pilot programs at ATL, DFW, DTW, and MIA. 

The support for the program has been overwhelmingly positive. We’ve received over 600 comments so far with 99% of the comments being supportive of this pilot. Here are just a few of the many:
“Holy Cow! I have signed up for the pilot program, as I travel every week and am blown away by the speed of the expedited lane! No shoe removal, no liquid removal, no computer removal, no one in line! For those few who were in line, we were laughing and so happy to have such a smooth process! Thank you!”
“The test process for Premium passengers is outstanding. The service, professionalism and communication could not have been better. I only hope the results have been as favorable as mine and the test expands. Thank you for its implementation.”
“What a joy pre-check was today. I travel frequently and at times wish a bathrobe would be offered to passengers at the door. I not only did NOT have to remove either shoes nor laptop, The pre-check reduces stress not only on passengers but your TSA employees as well. Smiles abounded. Thank you.”
In case you’re curious, you can read more here on  how to sign up to participate in TSA Pre✓™. Click here to learn more about TSA Pre™.
 
For those who will participate in the initial pilot, it is important to note that nothing will ever guarantee that an eligible passenger receives expedited security screening. We have built random and unpredictable factors throughout the aviation security system to guard against terrorists gaming the system and this program is no exception. 

TSA Blog Team

If you’d like to comment on an unrelated topic you can do so in our Off Topic Comments post. You can also view our blog post archives or search our blog to find a related topic to comment in. If you have a travel related issue or question that needs an immediate answer, you can contact a Customer Support Manager at the airport you traveled, or will be traveling through by using Talk to TSA.

41 comments:

Anonymous said...

Why should anyone have to remove their shoes, put their liquids into a bag, or remove their computers? None of these things are dangerous.

Saul said...

So for those who fly the most often, they get to (potentially: we gotta keep it random and unpredictable to keep those darn terrorists on their feet and guessing) experience airport security like in many other countries of the world: no shoe or laptop removal, no liquids removal.

Meanwhile, everyone else -- the large majority of passengers who are equally not a threat but whom the TSA deems suspicious because you don't know enough about us -- will continue to put up with the hassles and indignities of your checkpoints.

Of course those who have been selected to participate will be happy.

Perhaps, Bob, you'd be better off explaining off why in nearly no other country do passengers have to remove their shoes (at least for non-US-bound flights). How many of those countries have had their planes blown up by shoe bombs, Bob? How many?

Oh, that's right: no other country faces the kinds of threats that we do, so we have to do things differently.

Perhaps, Bob, you'd be better off explaining why nearly all other countries don't give their passengers the "choice" of being x-rayed or being intimately groped by a government agent.

Perhaps, Bob, you'd be better off explaining why it's okay for your agency to continually trash the Constitution.

But that would be all too hard. Instead we get to hear about how many guns your x-ray machines and metal detectors have found (note: not found with AIT), and how a select few passengers will have a little easier time going through the checkpoints.

[Screenshot captured.]

Nadav said...

I'm sorry, I still don't see any reason to surrender my privacy for a quicker line at the airport. I'll just do what I did until now - arrive early.

Nadav

Jim Huggins said...

The support for the program has been overwhelmingly positive.

Is that surprising? You give passengers a virtually empty screening line and exempt them from the most tedious of TSA's screening procedures ... what else did you expect to happen?

Get back to me when I, as someone who flies maybe 3-4 times a year, can participate in this program.

Adrian said...

This should work the other way around: passengers should receive profiles (name, address, phone number, credit score, education, employment history, criminal record, etc.) about the TSOs who rummage through their stuff and pat them down.

After all, the passengers are the ones at risk.

whaaaaa said...

the one percent that dont like it will be here complaining about it!!!!!

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...
Why should anyone have to remove their shoes, put their liquids into a bag, or remove their computers? None of these things are dangerous.
……
Pan Am Flight 103 was destroyed on Wednesday, 21 December 1988 by a small charge packed inside of a “Toshiba Bombeat radio cassette player”, killing 270 people both on the aircraft and on the ground.

None are dangerous? Please, leave the security to the professionals.

Anonymous said...

I looked into this new pre TSA program. There are fees, and it appears that these fees would apply even for someone who already had security clearance.

Thus...TSA is profiling based on disposable income.

Bubba said...

As a foreigner, I don´t qualify, so I still have to take my shoes off when connecting within the US, even though I am a frequent flier.

However, since I board abroad, I already flew over US territory for hours without ever taking off my shoes!

And nothing happened to that airplane.

Does that not prove that my shoes are not dangerous?

Can you explain the logic behind this to me, please?

Anonymous said...

Everyone should have a stress-free, shoe-removal-free, laptop-removal-free, no-liquid-madness travel experience. How about expanding to 100% of the flying population?

Chris Boyce said...

This indignation is exactly the same as the Communist system of "privileges". A totalitarian government grants essentially meaningless "privileges" (which are essentially rights the government took away in the first place) to a "special" class of people. The government creates a privileged class of people and demands their loyalty in return. The privileged class complies because they know that the government can take away these privileges anytime it wishes.

The lower class envies the privileged class and will take whatever action necessary to achieve the goal of becoming privileged themselves. They, too, will never speak out for fear of being forever banned from "privileged" consideration.

By creating this special class of travelers, Administrator Pistole is attempting to remove the most vocal and influential flyers from the public outrage at the TSA. They don't dare speak out for fear of having their privileges taken away.

This program doesn't have anything to do with "efficient use of screening resources." It has EVERYTHING to do with control and manipulation.

Anonymous said...

I did sign up and went through the revised process in Detroit. It was great. It should be expanded immediately.

Security Products said...

I agree that it should be somewhat random in the selection process, but terrorists can simply counter that by sending multiple people to throw the odds in their direction. We have intuition for a reason!!

Anonymous said...

I don't know why you chose not to post my comment so I'll post it again.

You are trying to divide and conquer.

You are attempting to placate frequent travelers who are some of your most vocal critics.

In the meanwhile, the average public will still be forced to throw away their bottles of shampoo, take their shoes off, have their no-no area touched during a pat-down, etc.

This is not the answer.

Anonymous said...

[[None are dangerous? Please, leave the security to the professionals.]]

Gladly!

Just keep in mind that a uniform does not a "professional" make.

That's all a great many TSA critics would love to have happen: make airflight security an activity handled by professionals. As it is, it's handled by the three-ring circus called TSA.

TSA would not have found a bomb in a cassette player - they don't look there. If they looked in every electronic device we'd have to line up four to six hours early instead of just two.

...but you'd know that if you were anything close to resembling a "security professional"...

A professionally-operated airflight security apparatus would base their security screenings around relative risk, and cost-effective mitigations. And gone would be the shoeless magnetometering, the liquids in 3oz bottles in clear plastic bags, the stick-em-up porno scans [now rendered cartoonish], and pretty much every paranoia created since the "Fly this plane to Cuba" days.

And if this professional security apparatus were to operate within the bounds of the US Constitution at the same time, why, those people who would be pulled aside would have a warrant citing Probable Cause already signed and waiting.

Ohhhh... if only ...

rwilymz
http://dblyelloline.blogspot.com/

Anonymous said...

"TSA would not have found a bomb in a cassette player - they don't look there."

Do you know what an X-ray is/does?

Anonymous said...

None are dangerous? Please, leave the security to the professionals.
_____________
The American people would gladly "leave the security to the professionals." We just don't consider a TSA employee to be secure or professional.

The Israelis have the best security in the world. They are truly professionals. I am more than willing to be delayed by someone who has a graduate degree, is an expert in Krav Maga, and fluent in multiple languages. This person is at the top of his game--subject to mandatory firing for one mistake. Just one. No excuses. No second chances.

Chris Boyce said...

Why did you censor the comment I sent about 7:00 Am this morning?

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...
Gladly!

Just keep in mind that a uniform does not a "professional" make.

That's all a great many TSA critics would love to have happen: make airflight security an activity handled by professionals. As it is, it's handled by the three-ring circus called TSA.
……

You think that the actual “professionals” are on the checkpoint? Yer kidding, right?

The professionals are the one’s making the policy and procedures that the TSA performs and follows at the checkpoint. The professionals are the ones with the advanced degrees, or who have decades in the field doing the work who are now doing the more advanced tasks that TSA has. For $12.85 an hour you get trained screeners, not the experts.


TSA would not have found a bomb in a cassette player - they don't look there. If they looked in every electronic device we'd have to line up four to six hours early instead of just two.

...but you'd know that if you were anything close to resembling a "security professional"...
……

You don’t know if they would have or not. Its great fun to speculate, specially if you have an agenda that you are bending the facts to meet, but the fact is that you have no idea if TSA would have found that device (other than the fact that the bomb began its travels in Germany and not the USA). You should really read more on the story of PanAm 103, its “educational”.


A professionally-operated airflight security apparatus would base their security screenings around relative risk, and cost-effective mitigations. And gone would be the shoeless magnetometering, the liquids in 3oz bottles in clear plastic bags, the stick-em-up porno scans [now rendered cartoonish], and pretty much every paranoia created since the "Fly this plane to Cuba" days.
……
Interesting opinion, but you mention nothing about having any expertise in the field. So, that makes it uninformed opinion.


And if this professional security apparatus were to operate within the bounds of the US Constitution at the same time, why, those people who would be pulled aside would have a warrant citing Probable Cause already signed and waiting.

Ohhhh... if only ...

rwilymz
……
So far the TSA IS operating within the confines of the Constitution. There is a great deal of speculation and opinion about their searches being outside of the confines of the 4th Amendment, but nothing to hang your hat on. Until the US Supreme Court weigh in (or refuse to) then all you have IS speculation and opinion. Hang your hat on that and you will also be out of a hat.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...
Anonymous said...
Why should anyone have to remove their shoes, put their liquids into a bag, or remove their computers? None of these things are dangerous.
……
Pan Am Flight 103 was destroyed on Wednesday, 21 December 1988 by a small charge packed inside of a “Toshiba Bombeat radio cassette player”, killing 270 people both on the aircraft and on the ground.


And how, exactly, would making that bomber remove his shoes, or put his 3.4 ounce tube of toothpaste in a quart-sized baggie have made a difference???


None are dangerous? Please, leave the security to the professionals.

So you agree we should get rid of the TSA and hire some professionals?

RB said...

Anon said……

Pan Am Flight 103 was destroyed on
Wednesday, 21 December 1988 by a small charge packed inside of a “Toshiba Bombeat radio cassette player”, killing 270 people both on the aircraft and on the ground.

None are dangerous? Please, leave the security to the professionals.

November 9, 2011 8:32 PM
...................
Yes, it is believed that a portable radio configured as a bomb and loaded in the cargo hold was responsible for this.

Yet even after 10 years of TSA being in place TSA still fails to screen 100% of cargo loaded onto passenger aircraft.

Congress has mandated that TSA perform this function and TSA has blown off Congress.

Recent reporting out of Atlanta demonstrated how food vendors that bring beverages and food aboard aircraft are a serious security breech yet TSA does nothing.

TSA isn't about security, TSA is about making a show of security.

TSA feels up little kids and old ladies, takes nude pictures of travelers, and harasses people for no reason, that is what TSA calls security

Anonymous said...

This is so lame.

Anonymous said...

How can anybody believe a pre-check will actually be able to screen out terrorists?

The TSA can't manage to identify criminals in their own work force, how are they going to identify terrorists in the general flying public?

Anonymous said...

"Pan Am Flight 103 was destroyed on Wednesday, 21 December 1988 by a small charge packed inside of a “Toshiba Bombeat radio cassette player”, killing 270 people both on the aircraft and on the ground."

And how would making passengers remove their shoes, liquids, and laptops have helped find an explosive inside a cassette player, exactly, O security professional?

Anonymous said...

Pan Am Flight 103 was destroyed on Wednesday, 21 December 1988 by a small charge packed inside of a “Toshiba Bombeat radio cassette player”, killing 270 people both on the aircraft and on the ground.

None are dangerous? Please, leave the security to the professionals.
____________
Interesting case. This flight was a failure at the highest levels. The blame lies there.

The CIA KNEW there was a flight risk 3 weeks before the attack because a man called and told them. The CIA and State Department issued official bulletins to "special" people--embassy workers, journalists, and certain business people. These people could choose whether to fly or not. The average person?? No one cared.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...
"Do you know what an X-ray is/does?"

Do you know what the inside of every possible electronic device looks like in a X-ray to detect if it's been modified?

Sure, a sloppy job will be noticed in a X-ray, but are you really confident they will spot a carefully done modification?

Also remember that multiple people can be used to each carry in a piece of a weapon, which make it easier to disguise each part.

TrackerNeil said...

This part of the blog post jumped out at me:

"For those who will participate in the initial pilot, it is important to note that nothing will ever guarantee that an eligible passenger receives expedited security screening. We have built random and unpredictable factors throughout the aviation security system to guard against terrorists gaming the system and this program is no exception."

Unless I am mistaken, this means that, even after I provide the personal information required to qualify for this program, I can still be forced to undergo standard screening. In that case, I will have disclosed a bunch of personal information to the TSA and gotten nothing in return.

What happens if this program is terminated a year after it goes "live"? Is the provided information purged? I still have never received an answer to that question.

Mike Toreno said...

"How can anybody believe a pre-check will actually be able to screen out terrorists?

The TSA can't manage to identify criminals in their own work force, how are they going to identify terrorists in the general flying public?"

The TSA IS NOT THE AGENCY DOING THE PRE-CHECK. They are piggybacking onto Trusted Traveler programs administered by other government agencies. All the TSA has to do is remember what (for example) a Nexus Card looks like. That's a simple enough job that they can probably be expected to do it most of the time, and if there's somebody working the checkpoint that didn't pay attention during the training, TSA can just fire that person and hire somebody who will pay attention.

Mike Toreno said...

TrackerNeil, I understand your concern, but you aren't disclosing the information to the TSA. I think most of the programs are administered by CPB. TSA is just piggybacking on. If you get a Nexus Card, you have access to a special lane to cross the US-Canada border, and let me tell you something, if you frequently drive back and forth to Canada over a checkpoint that has a Nexus lane, it is totally worth it no matter what TSA does or doesn't do.

RB said...

Mike Toreno said...
"How can anybody believe a pre-check will actually be able to screen out terrorists?

The TSA can't manage to identify criminals in their own work force, how are they going to identify terrorists in the general flying public?"

The TSA IS NOT THE AGENCY DOING THE PRE-CHECK. They are piggybacking onto Trusted Traveler programs administered by other government agencies. All the TSA has to do is remember what (for example) a Nexus Card looks like. That's a simple enough job that they can probably be expected to do it most of the time, and if there's somebody working the checkpoint that didn't pay attention during the training, TSA can just fire that person and hire somebody who will pay attention.

November 12, 2011 3:30 PM

..................
TSA recoginze Nexus cards? Not there is a challenge!

Mike Toreno said...

RB, I have presented my Nexus card at the checkpoint about 7 or 8 times and only once has a TSA agent not known what it was. I didn't say they would always know what it is, I said they mostly would not what it is. And if TSA starts firing people for not paying attention during the training, they would achieve a pretty nearly 100% rate of recognizing the cards. Recognizing a Nexus card is within the ability of a TSA agent; failing to recognize one is just a matter of laziness. A little motivation (such as a few firings) should take care of any laziness issues.

Anonymous said...

The support shown to TSA agents is on the equal to the support our troops were shown in Vietnam.They fight everyday for your protection and get spit on. The traveling public is ignorant to what they think is truth about TSA. I know for the majority of these agents, they are trained professionals who take pride in what they do everyday. True patriots can discribe a good number of them. It is unfortunate that some lesser Officers become the focus of the public. Think for a moment of what it would be like if they were not there. Would you feel safe enough to fly. NOT ME. My hats off to these Officers for my in-flight protection. Lets give them the support they deserve. Your inconvience going through Security is a small price to pay.

Anonymous said...

Mike Toreno said...
"The TSA IS NOT THE AGENCY DOING THE PRE-CHECK. They are piggybacking onto Trusted Traveler programs administered by other government agencies."

It doesn't really make a difference who does it. A background check will *never* catch 100% of the terrorists. Just not possible. The basic idea behind this program is defective.

Anonymous said...

[[The professionals are the one’s making the policy and procedures that the TSA performs and follows at the checkpoint]]

Yer kidding, right?

The ones making policy are policy wonks; they are career bureaucrats. The rules they come up with are invented not because they are effective, but because they are easy to implement. From Day One, the security professionals have been criticizing TSA policies for these and other reasons.

[[You don’t know if they would have or not.]]

Actually, yes I do. And for the guy who thinks that an x-ray can discern a bomb inside a metalic object ... for anyone to find a bomb inside a cassette player you'd have to disassemble the cassette player. X-rays don't bend around objects that reflect x-rays.

[[you mention nothing about having any expertise in the field]]

Gratuitous contradiction isn't an argument. It's a rationalization.

[[So far the TSA IS operating within the confines of the Constitution.]]

So you've never read the thing, then.

Find "administrative search" in the Constitution. Come back when you find those words. Until then, you are wrong and you either:
1] know it, or you are
2] lying to yourself and others by extension.

No, son, what you meant to say is that the TSA is operating within the confines of prior Supreme Court rulings. The Constitution and Supreme Court rulings are not the same. And where they differ ... the Constitution is right by definition, but the Supreme Court ruling is the policy.

As for where one hangs his hat, you can be a totalitarian apologist if you choose; I am content being correct.

rwilymz
http://dblyelloline.blogspot.com/

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...
"Think for a moment of what it would be like if they were not there."

Wonderful

"Would you feel safe enough to fly."

Absolutely

Anonymous said...

"And where they differ ... the Constitution is right by definition, but the Supreme Court ruling is the policy."

Very well put. As examples to how the Supreme Court got this wrong, consider the Dred Scott decision and/or Plessey vs. Ferguson, both incredibly unconstitutional decisions from SCOTUS. Both were later "re-decided."

Anonymous said...

"The ones making policy are policy wonks; they are career bureaucrats. The rules they come up with are invented not because they are effective, but because they are easy to implement. From Day One, the security professionals have been criticizing TSA policies for these and other reasons."

100% on target. The 3-1-1 rule came from the office of an advisor to the President. He was even teased by his colleagues. Any technical justification came after the fact and you'll notice that the substatiation is lacking for many of the reasons cited here.

I won't put the name of the advisor, since Bob would undoubtedly reject this post on that basis despite that person being a public person.

Care to contradict me on this? Give it a shot.

(screen shot captured)

thomas said...

It's a good thing that the character up above listed him or herself as anonymous, to say something so stupid. Of course liquids and things are dangerous; terrorists are getting more and more sophisticated in showing us all their inadequate personalities.

Taj Mahal tours said...

Yes, it is believed that a portable radio configured as a bomb and loaded in the cargo hold was responsible for this.

Yet even after 10 years of TSA being in place TSA still fails to screen 100% of cargo loaded onto passenger aircraft.

Congress has mandated that TSA perform this function and TSA has blown off Congress.

Recent reporting out of Atlanta demonstrated how food vendors that bring beverages and food aboard aircraft are a serious security breech yet TSA does nothing.

Mel said...

I don’t know why everyone has a problem with taking their shoes off or having their laptop bag checked. Yeah it can be annoying waiting in a queue for an hour in security checks but I am sure you would prefer this then for someone to sneak a weapon on board a plane. Just get to the airport early and you will have no problems. It’s a no win situation...if something does happen on board an aircraft the first thing that will be said is why didn’t airport security pick it up but when they do their jobs they get moaned at for doing their job properly.

Transformers games said...

Maybe it would be a better idea to keep developments like pre-screening under wraps? I commend TSA for the dedicated job they do every minute of every hour, but in countries other than America, things like that would only be on a need-to-know basis. Don't arm these losers with any more info as ammo, y'know what I mean?