Is the TSA allowing convicted rapists to perform pat-down searches?

Last Thursday, without much fanfare, TSA announced that it would start a new screening procedure that would include more pat-down searches nationwide. USA Today reports that in the new procedures, screeners' hands would slide over a passenger's body, requiring screeners to touch passengers' breasts and genitals. In addition to questions over whether this change is necessary or effective, another question that many passengers may have in the backs of their minds is whether the TSA screeners have a criminal background that should preclude them from such sensitive duties.

Possible reasons for the new procedures
There is some debate over whether these procedures are either useful or necessary. There are certainly threats to airliners from bombs that could be carried on a person's body, such as the bomb used in the unsuccessful bombing attempt on a Delta airliner last December. However, it is not at all clear that this new pat-down procedure would have found that explosive device.

The more recent incident involving two bombs sent as cargo from Yemen to the US could indicate renewed efforts to target US airliners. However, there has been no public acknowledgement by the TSA, the US government, or any other government that there is any increased threat to air travel from bombs hidden beneath clothing. Certainly the new pat-down procedure is a very public and very noticeable increase in security, but not one that is directly linked to any immediate threat.

TSA employees with faulty criminal background checks
The TSA serves a very important and vital role in airline security, and all of their employees are required to pass security and background checks. However, those checks in the past have been less than thorough. For example, in 2004, the Department of Homeland Security (which includes TSA) released a report that stated that TSA had allowed some screeners to perform their duties before their criminal background checks were complete, and allowed others to continue working while problems with their background checks were resolved. Even if this problem no longer exists for current applicants and employees, a more serious problem may be that the current system of background checks may have allowed those convicted of rape and other sexually based offenses to join TSA.

Are current TSA background checks too limited?
The 2004 DHS report stated that federal regulations (49 CFR. § 1542.209) specified were 28 kinds of felony convictions that would have disqualified an applicant for a TSA screener position, including rapes or crimes involving aggravated sexual abuse, but only if those convictions had occurred in the previous 10 years. It implies that a person convicted of rape, attempted rape, child molestation, or similar crimes may not be required to report such convictions during their background check and may be allowed to perform pat-down searches on passengers.

It is unclear if TSA has changed its background check requirements since 2004 to exclude any convicted sex offenders from working directly with passengers. However, the fact that in the past it may have been possible that someone with that kind of criminal past may be a TSA screener may concern most passengers.

Are convicted rapists performing pat-down searches?
The full details of the the TSA's process for reviewing current and potential employees is not available to the public. Whatever those procedures are, a reasonable passenger would agree that anyone who has been found guilty of any crime that involves rape or some similar criminal act should not be allowed to search passengers. If the TSA could publicly address the following questions, it may go a long way toward reducing the public's concern over the new pat-down procedures:

• Are there any current TSA employees who are convicted sex offenders (either for a felony or lesser crime, either as an adult or juvenile), even if the conviction occurred more than 10 years before joining TSA?
  
  
• If the answer to the first question is yes, are any of these employees acting as security screeners who must have direct physical contact with the flying public?
  
  
• If the answer to the first question is no, have all TSA employees, as part of their background check, been asked if they have been convicted of rape or some other sexually based crime, whether it were a felony or lesser crime, either as an adult or as a juvenile, even if the conviction occurred more than 10 years before joining TSA?
  
  
• If the first question can't be answered for a TSA employee because of inadequate information, would this employee be restricted from working in a position that involves direct physical contact with the flying public?
  
  
• Are TSA security screeners who are convicted of rape or another sexually based crime, no matter how minor, immediately removed from any position where they may have physical contact with the traveling public?

Unless the TSA is both willing and able to answer these and similar questions, the average traveler may be very reluctant to submit to invasive searches where TSA security officers have to physically touch them in sensitive areas, making it more difficult for the TSA to accomplish its security mission.

What to do if searched
While searching passengers, including pat down searches of breasts and genital areas, may be necessary for security purposes, it would be considered very intrusive by most passengers. If you are selected for this kind of search, you should insist that it be done in a dignified manner. It should be done in a screened off area so that you can't be viewed by others in the vicinity, and the TSA representative should act in a professional manner.

Dealing with abuses
If you feel that you were not treated with dignity or respect during a pat down search, you should take appropriate actions such as calling attention to anything that you think is unnecessary or having a TSA supervisor or law enforcement official present. You can also file a complaint with the TSA, with the AirSafe.com complaint process, or with an organization like the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU). The ACLU has noted several types of common abuses:

• Unnecessary groping of passengers’ breast or genital areas
  
  
• Humiliating experiences including for disabled or transgendered passengers
  
  
• Lack of privacy during pat-downs
  
  
• Lack of respect for religious requirements.

If you feel that you have not been treated in a fair and professional matter, you can contact the ACLU and provide them with details about your experience.

Resources
Interviews on Rudy Maxa's World featuring Dr. Todd Curtis (10:40)
DHS report on TSA screener background checks
WTOP interview on November 16, 2010 with Dr. Todd Curtis about new pat-down TSA procedures (5:12)

Photo: Joe Philipson

TSA screening of air cargo for bombs and explosives

This week's attempted shipment of multiple explosive devices on US airliners was successfully discovered and stopped before the bombs could be triggered. While a potential tragedy was avoided, this latest attempt focused the public's attention on efforts by the airline industry to keep bombs off of airplanes.

Most passenger airliners carry both passenger baggage and air cargo. While all passengers and their baggage are screened for explosives and other prohibited items, it may surprise many passengers to find that some air cargo is not screened for explosives prior to being placed on a passenger aircraft.

Latest bombing attempt
The investigation into the latest bombing attempt is in its very earliest stages, but it appears that at least two explosive devices were shipped from the country of Yemen, and were addressed to synagogues or Jewish community centers in the Chicago area.

It is not clear if the packages that contained the devices were screened before being shipped. It is also not clear if the devices were intended to go off during the flight.

Both packages were shipped from Yemen to Dubai. One of the packages was intercepted on a FedEx plane that was in Dubai, and the second was discovered on a UPS aircraft after the aircraft had landed at the East Midlands airport in the UK.

The two devices, which were hidden within printer toner cartridges, used the same kind of explosive material as was used in the device in the unsuccessful Christmas day 2009 attempted bombing of a Delta aircraft.

Air Cargo security and screening basics
While the two airlines involved in this week's attempt fly only cargo and not passengers, passenger airliners also carry a significant fraction of the air cargo the comes in to the US from overseas and cargo that is flown on domestic routes. Since, 9/11, the US government and the airline industry have gone to great lengths to keep explosives and other banned items out of air cargo. A June 2010 report from the General Accountability Office (GAO-10-446) provides both an overview of the air cargo security process and provides answers to the following air cargo security questions.

How much air cargo is shipped in the US each year?

According to the GAO report, over 3.65 million tons of air cargo was shipped in the US on passenger flights in 2008, with 42% of that amount coming to the US from overseas. To get a feel for home much air cargo this represents, imagine the size and weight of a fully loaded Nimitz class aircraft carrier, which at over 1,000 feet long and displacing more than 100,000 tons is the largest ship in the US Navy. If all 10 ships in the Navy's arsenal were lined up end to end, they would stretch out for over two miles, but would still be less than one third of the weight of air cargo shipped last year in the US on passenger flights. The GAO also stated that passenger aircraft only accounted for about one sixth of air cargo shipped, so the total shipped each year on passenger and all cargo aircraft would be equal in weight to about 200 aircraft carriers.

How is cargo shipped?
Depending on the cargo and the aircraft, air cargo is typically shipped in unit load devices (ULD) such as a metal container or a cargo pallet, on wooden skids, or as loose cargo. This variety of shipping methods can make scanning cargo for explosives, drugs, improperly packed hazardous materials, and other dangerous items quite difficult.



Who is involved in the air cargo process?
Key participants in the air cargo shipping process include shippers, for example individuals, retail stores, or manufacturers; freight forwarders who may consolidate and ship cargo from many different shippers; air cargo handling agents who process, load, and unload cargo onto aircraft; and the air carriers that load and transport the cargo. Some shippers may bypass freight forwarders and deliver a shipment directly to an airline or air cargo handling agent.

Who is responsible for air cargo security?
Transportation Security Administration (TSA) is the primary federal agency responsible for securing the air cargo system. TSA establishes security requirements for domestic and foreign air carriers that transport cargo, and also for domestic freight forwarders. TSA has a staff of inspectors who make sure that air carriers and domestic freight forwarders are in compliance with security requirements. These requirements include measures related to the acceptance, handling, and screening of cargo; training of employees in security and cargo screening procedures; testing for employee proficiency in cargo screening; and access to cargo areas and aircraft.

According to TSA, there are currently about 620 Transportation Security Inspectors dedicated to the oversight of air cargo, with about 120 of these inspectors assigned to canine teams.

Who does the actual screening of cargo?
For US domestic flights or international flights headed to the US, cargo screening may be done by the shipper, by a freight forwarder, the air carrier, or by TSA personnel. Outside the US, additional screening and security checks may be provided by other governments or other organizations.

How is cargo screened?
Screening methods include using various kinds of x-ray detectors to screen for explosives, chemical testing of the exterior surface of cargo to detect explosives, using dogs to detect explosives, and physical inspection of the contents of a package or container.

Is all cargo screened or inspected?
Currently, not all air cargo on US domestic flights or on flights bound to the US from overseas is required to be screened or physically inspected. For example, cargo that is transferred from an inbound international flight to a domestic flight is not required to be screened. There are also some types of domestic cargo that are exempt from TSA screening, though information on exactly what kind of cargo this represents is a sensitive security matter and that information is not released to the general public.

What percentage of cargo is screened?
According to the GAO, as of March 2010 about 68% of all cargo (by weight) on domestic US passenger flights was screened. This was less than TSA's target of having 75% screened by March 2010.

Since October 2008, TSA has ensured that 100% of all cargo on narrow-bodied passenger aircraft has been screened. These flights account for only about 25% of all cargo shipped on domestic passenger flights. This implies that just over 60% of the cargo on wide-bodied passenger aircraft on domestic flights is currently screened.

British Airways chairman calls for changes to US security procedures

On October 26, 2010, at the annual conference of the U.K. Airport Operators Association. British Airways chairman Martin Broughton called for changes to the security requirements for international flights bound for the US. He claimed that a number of elements in the current security program, including separate checks of laptop computers and forcing people to take off their shoes for screenting are completely redundant and should reviewed. He also pointed out that the requirements for international flights to the US and domestic flights within the US were not consistent.

The following day, I spoke with the BBC radio program Europe Today about Broughton's concerns and why these security differences exist. Also interviewed in the following segment was former British Airways executive Jamie Bowden.

Listen to the interview (8:30)

Related AirSafeNews.com Articles
AirSafeNews.com article on the attempted bombing
Description of four key US terrorist and TSA security databases
US security rules and baggage restrictions

Share Your Unexpected Airline Change Fee Story

Have you been one of the many thousands of passengers who received an unexpected change fee from your airline? Have you been so upset that you wanted to tell your story to someone? Now you have your chance to tell your story to more than just your family and friends. AirSafeNews.com, working with the Kaplan Casting, would like to hear your story.

Kaplan Casting is looking for documented cases of passengers who have been charged unexpected "change fees" by their airline. Kaplan is very interested in business travelers and families, but will consider anyone of any age or background for a television commercial. If you are chosen, you will be paid Screen Actors Guild (SAG) rates for your time on the set.

What to do to be considered
To have your story considered, you have to have some kind of documentation of the airline change fee, and must provide us with basic details about the flight. If you are interested, please fill out the form below and submit it to AirSafe.com News. Kaplan Casting or AirSafe.com will contact you if we want to talk with you further.

---

Note: AirSafe.com and Kaplan Casting is no longer taking additional reports. Thank you if you have contributed a report earlier.

---

Photo: Steve Wampler

CBS Radio Interview about Suspicious Passengers

Dr. Curtis was interviewed by CBS Radio News about the August 2010 detention of two passengers in Amsterdam on suspicion of being involved in some kind of terror related event. The passengers were later released because they had done nothing wrong.

On August 30th, 2010, two men, Ahmed Mohamed Nasser al-Soofi and Hezam al-Murisi, who were both on their way to Yemen from the US, were arrested in Amsterdam after they had arrived on a flight from Chicago. They were arrested because they were suspected to be part of some kind of terror related activity, perhaps a dry run for an attempted bombing of an aircraft.

Al-Soofi had raised suspicion earlier in the day prior to his flight from Birmingham, Alabama to Chicago. After being chosen for additional screening, authorities found that he was carrying $7,000 in cash, and in his checked luggage were a cell phone taped to a small bottle, multiple cell phones and watches taped together, a knife, and a box cutter. Al-Soofi had violated no laws or regulations, so he was allowed to continue.

Later in Chicago, he had changed his flight, and his checked bags ended up going on a different flight. Coincidentally, Hezam al-Murisi, who also changed his flight to to one carrying Al-Soofi, also had his bags going on a different flight. US authorities asked Dutch authorities to detain the men, and they were both arrested after arriving in Amsterdam.

The CBS interview covered several subjects including whether the behavior of these passengers should have aroused suspicions. At the time of the interview, early reports suggested that they were traveling together. In fact, while the two were on the same flight out of Chicago, they did not know each other and were traveling independently, with only Al-Soofi starting his trip in Birmingham.

The Dutch authorities soon released both men, and dropped all charges. In short, although what the two men did during their trip looked unusual or even suspicious, they had done nothing wrong, and had broken no law or violated any regulation. The lesson to take away from this episode is that the US authorities, including TSA and Homeland Security, may be inclined to take all kinds of precautionary actions, including detaining passengers, if they suspect that someone is attempting to bring harm to an airplane flight.

Should passengers change their behavior to keep from being hassled? According to Dr. Curtis, that is a personal decision best left to individual passengers. In his opinion, you're free to act as suspicious as you want, just keep in mind that the price of freedom is an increased chance of being hassled or even detained.

Listen to the interview (10:19)

Related AirSafeNews.com Articles
AirSafeNews.com article on the attempted bombing
Description of four key US terrorist and TSA security databases
BBC interview with AirSafeNews.com's Dr. Todd Curtis

Russian Airliner Makes Emergency Landing at Abandoned Airport

7 September 2010; Alrosa Mirny Air Enterprise; Tu154M; RA-85684; flight 514, Izhma, Russia: The aircraft was on a scheduled domestic flight from Udachny to Moscow, Russia. While en route at about FL347 near over Usinsk, Russia, the aircraft experienced a complete electrical failure that resulted in a loss of navigational equipment, fuel pumps, and flaps.

Effects of loss of electrical power
The Tupolev Tu154 uses the electric pumps that move the fuel from wing and center section fuel tanks into an engine feed tank. Inoperative fuel pumps left the crew with just the usable fuel in the engine feed tank, which provided about 30 minutes of flying time. Although the flaps are hydraulically driven, the switches that control the flaps are electrically driven, preventing the crew from using flaps during any landing attempt.

Successful emergency landingThe crew chose to land the airplane at an abandoned runway near the town of Izhma. The runway is about 4,000 feet (1,220 meters) long, and the aircraft overran the runway by about 150-200 meters, plowing through trees and other vegetation, and coming to rest in soft ground. According to a report in RT.com, one of the passengers described the aircraft as “cutting the tree tops like a lawnmower.” None of the nine crew members or 72 passengers were injured.

News report on emergency landing



Shorter news report on emergency landing

Additional Information
Accident information from Wikipedia
Russian plane crashes

Comic relief and plane crashes
When planes crash and everyone walks away to fly again, the world breaths a sigh of relief. When there is a happy ending like with this Alrosa accident, one of the ways that the average person responds is with a bit of humor. The following cartoon depicting Mother Nature's reaction to the impending emergency landing was published by the TV-Novosti site RT.com.

UPS 747 Crash in Dubai Kills Crew

3 September 2010; United Parcel Service (UPS); 747-400F; N571UP; flight 6; Dubai, United Arab Emirates: The aircraft was on an international cargo flight from Dubai, UAE to Colonge, Germany, and crashed shortly after takeoff about 10 km (6.2 mi) north of the airport. The two crew members were killed.

About the Boeing 747
This was the second fatal plane crash involving 747-400 series. The only previous fatal crash of a 747-400 was a 2000 crash of a Singapore Airlines in Taipei, Taiwan. The various models of the 747 have been involved in 28 crashes that have resulted in the death of at least one passenger, and seven fatal crashes of cargo or military versions of the aircraft. The earliest fatal passenger plane crash was a 1974 Lufthansa accident in Nairobi, Kenya, and the most recent passenger crash was a 2005 Saudi Arabian Airlines crash in Sri Lanka. The most recent cargo crash was a 2008 accident in Colombia involving Kalitta Air that killed three people on the ground.

About United Parcel Service
United Parcel Service (UPS) has been offering air cargo services since the early 1980s. The current UPS fleet has well over 200 aircraft, including about a dozen 747s. This is the third UPS crash that destroyed an aircraft, and the first fatal crash for United Parcel Service.

Related resources
UPS plane crashes
747 plane crashes
UPS fleet

Graphic: Gulf News