From Pat-Downs to Full Body Scanners: The TSA Firestorm

independenttraveler.com


Editor's Note: Since this story was published, the TSA announced that pilots and flight attendants in uniform will be exempt from going through the new full body scanners at the airport. They will still need to go through a metal detector and present two forms of photo ID. Pilots and flight attendants who are not in uniform or on official business will have to go through the same security procedures as all other travelers. These procedures are described below.

The Transportation Security Administration (TSA) certainly has a firestorm on its hands as the agency continues to roll out its full body scanning machines (which are now labeled with the bureaucratically neutral name Advanced Imaging Technology machines). The use of these scanners has precipitated extremely aggressive pat-downs for those travelers who choose not to go through the machines, whether for health or privacy reasons.

These past couple of weeks, it seems like it is almost every day that a traveler has another bruising encounter with the TSA. On November 6, John Tyner was kicked out of the San Diego airport for refusing both the full body scanner and a pat-down. Tyner's blog post and film of his experience have turned into a media sensation.

It's one thing when uber-privacy advocates, bloggers and even regular (if deservedly) recalcitrant travelers refuse to go through the scanners, filming their experience the whole way -- but it is another thing entirely when a growing number of professional pilots refuse to submit to the scans.

• First, ExpressJet/Continental Express pilot Michael Roberts refused to go through a scanner; he quickly became the poster man for the issue, and garnered considerable support from other pilots.
  
  
• Last week, Continental pilot Ann Poe refused to be subjected to the new pat-downs; Poe has an artificial hip that always trips the metal detectors, so she ould have to undergo a mandatory pat-down for every single flight she flies. With the pat-downs now much more invasive, she refused.
  
  
• In somewhat less dramatic but no less disconcerting fashion, author/pilot Patrick Smith of Salon's Ask the Pilot also refused to enter the scanning machines this month, and wrote about it here, the punch line being that there were no actual body scanning machines at the airport -- the agents seemed just to be practicing on Smith.

As red flags go, the refusal of the very people flying the planes to submit to the new security procedure is a pretty big one. That the TSA has a problem with pilots edges into the absurd -- you have to think that if a person who is driving a plane wants to take it down, he or she is going to figure out a way to do so. And with more than all due respect to the countless very professional TSA and other government security agents doing their jobs well and correctly, nearly every casual traveler has encountered agents who are not so professional in one way or another -- whether in their demeanor, comments, abuse of power or even just wearing a bad mood on their sleeves. So it's not hard to imagine not wanting to subject yourself to the whole thing every day just to be able to go do your job.

On the other hand, the flying public is reasonable in feeling that what is good for the goose is good for the gander: if the current system is good enough for us mere tax-paying citizen travelers, it should be good enough for pilots, and airport workers, and everyone, really. If the system were in fact safe and respectful of folks, the pilots wouldn't have a beef.

For the record, I have no problem with scanning machines (and have gone on record saying as much), as long as they do not pose a health problem -- which is still under debate, as I will show below. On a privacy basis, I really don't care if some security guard sees me quasi-naked; people see each other in various states of disrobe all the time, not only in hospitals and doctors' offices 24 hours a day, but in non-medical situations at the local pool, the gym and public restrooms. Trust me, I am no exhibitionist; I just couldn't really care less if one more person happens to see me sort of in my birthday suit, especially if the person in question is in a separate booth and can't actually associate my face with the body on the screen.

Currently, TSA has 385 imaging technology machines at 68 airports and plans to deploy approximately 500 units this year. TSA plans to purchase and deploy an additional 500 units in 2011. Unless pilot and traveler complaints really gain traction, these machines are not going away, so in hopes of cutting through the media noise and rising anger on the subject, I have tried to address most of the major issues below, with comments and clarifications from Sarah Horowitz of the Transportation Security Administration.

The Machines
The TSA currently uses two different scanning machines; the first uses a millimeter wave technology, which Horowitz of the TSA writes "bounces harmless electromagnetic waves off of the human body to create an image resembling a fuzzy photo negative."

The other uses backscatter X-ray technology: "Backscatter technology projects an ionizing X-ray beam over the body surface to produce an image that resembles a chalk-etching."

Radiation
Irrespective of your position on privacy issues, radiation risks are and should be of serious concern to everyone.

I asked the TSA about the risks, and received the following from Horowitz, which I reproduce here in full:

Imaging technology is safe for passengers, and the technology meets all national safety and health standards. Backscatter technology was evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration's (FDA) Center for Devices and Radiological Health (CDRH), the National Institute for Standards and Technology (NIST), and the Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory (APL). All results confirmed that the radiation doses for the individuals being screened, operators, and bystanders were well below the dose limits specified by the American National Standards Institute. Each full body scan with backscatter produces less than 10 microREM of emission, the equivalent to the exposure each person receives in about 2 minutes of airplane flight at altitude. The energy emitted by millimeter wave technology is thousands of times less than what is permitted for a cell phone.

Before TSA purchases technology, the technology is validated by manufacturers to ensure it meets national safety standards. TSA also conducts site acceptance testing of [Advanced Imaging Technology] to ensure individual AIT units meet safety standards. Once installed, TSA ensures the required manufacturer's preventive maintenance is performed by qualified personnel. Certified Health Physicists with the U.S. Army Public Health Command (Provisional) are performing additional radiation safety surveys and area dosimetry studies to ensure continued compliance with radiation safety standards.

Having extensively reviewed both scientific statements and utter rants about this issue, I would say that the jury is still out to some extent. For a look at some of the facts and concerns, which lack of space and my own lack of expertise will not permit me to address at length here, I suggest starting with the Wikipedia articles about the technologies, which will point you to a number of resources (with the standard caveat that Wikipedia is an open source encyclopedia, and is not necessarily vetted by experts).

• http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Backscatter_X-ray#Health_effects
  
• http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millimeter_wave_scanner#Possible_health_effects

It does appear that the backscatter machines are more of a cause for concern, at least so far, so if you are really worried, you might ask what kind of machine is in use before you walk through. Note that some travelers have reported that TSA agents on site did not know which kind of machine was in use at their own security stations, so have been unable to answer the question.

Privacy: The Scanners


The privacy issue is proving to be a thicket of problems for the TSA, to the extent that the ACLU is involved. Concerns arise due both to the images displayed by the scanning machines and seen by TSA agents, and to the new aggressive pat-down procedures.

To address the scanned images, as I suggest elsewhere in this report, the scanner images do show travelers in a sort of quasi-naked state. The image at right is an example from one of the backscatter machines.

It is clear that specific body parts can be detected, if in a sort of "line drawing" rendering; the TSA describes these as a "fuzzy photo negative" for the millimeter wave machine, and resembling a "chalk etching" for the backscatter machine. Both types of machines do apply filters to attempt to enhance privacy; the millimeter wave machine blurs facial features, and the backscatter machine has a privacy filter applied to the entire body.

Editor's Note: Since the publication of this article, the TSA has changed the way images are captured so that threats are shown on a generic gray outline of a body. See Are the TSA's New Body Scans Less Embarrassing?

As for storing the images, Horowitz writes, "Imaging technology cannot store, export, print or transmit images. All images are deleted from the system after they are reviewed by the remotely located operator. All machines have zero storage capability because they are disabled by the vendor before they reach airports. No cameras, cellular telephones or any device capable of capturing an image is permitted in the resolution room." Also, it is my understanding that the images are deleted before the next passenger can be scanned.

The public's confidence that the images are being deleted are not helped by reports that a courthouse in Florida, which used extremely similar machines and made similar claims that nothing was being saved, was discovered earlier this year to have archived thousands of these images. The TSA says its machines are different, but many travelers remain skeptical.

Privacy: Pat-Downs
The new procedures now allow TSA agents doing pat-downs to use the front of their hands and to conduct what turn out in practice to be unarguably intimate searches of travelers' entire bodies. For some revealing video of how aggressive these pat-downs can be, see this video from a recent Today Show. As many have reported, agents really are touching folks' "private" parts.

Unfortunately, this pat-down is the only alternative to the full body scanner. If there is a scanner in your security lane and you prefer to opt out, you are in for a very aggressive pat-down. Herein lies the problem for many travelers -- potentially unsafe X-rays or a full groping are now part of the cost of taking a flight to attend a bat mitzvah or beach vacation these days.

Also, going through the full body scanner is no guarantee that you won't have to go through a pat-down as well. If any anomalies are detected during the scan, officers may take you aside for a pat-down; the same applies if you are selected for random screening.

Pat-downs are conducted by officers of your gender, and you have the right to request a private screening at any point. And for worried parents, Horowitz tells us, "After a thorough risk assessment and after hearing concerns from parents, TSA made the decision that a modified pat-down would be used for children 12 years old and under who require extra screening."

Editor's Note: In September 2011, the TSA announced further changes to the screening procedure for children 12 or younger. They will no longer have to remove their shoes before going through the checkpoint, and if the metal detector or full body scanner detects any anomalies, the child may be able to go through the machine again in lieu of a pat-down. The screener may also choose to swab the child's hands for explosives before resorting to a pat-down.

For disabled travelers who are unable to stand unassisted for five to seven seconds in a full body scanning machine with their hands raised above shoulder level, a pat-down will be required, Horowitz tells us. "Passengers who can neither walk nor stand are ineligible for advanced imaging technology screening and receive alternative screening using a pat-down procedure while passengers remain in the wheelchair," she says. "Regardless of the degree of mobility, passengers' wheelchairs are thoroughly inspected and any removable items are required to undergo X-ray screening. As with all passengers, travelers with special needs, or their caregivers, can request private screening at any point during the screening process."

Security: Do The Machines and Procedures Make Us More Secure?

I don't consider myself a TSA apologist by any means, but I have to admit that I buy into the notion that careful passenger screening is a deterrent to terrorist activities. It will not work all the time, and the TSA has definitely not done a great job of explaining themselves either on a macro policy level, or when face-to-face with travelers. They seem to dither on silly stuff (iPad out of bag or not?), and overreach egregiously on important stuff -- threatening to lock up people who do not want to be groped is the stuff of police states, not of safety enhancement.

One of the most persuasive elements of pilot objection to the procedures derives from the fact that while pilots must go through the scanners, potentially hundreds of other airport employees, from food vendors to maintenance crew, apparently may not. If the whole point of the process is that anyone who is on the airplane side of the security checks is considered safe, it is hardly reassuring that cleaners, caterers, fuelers and other people with full access do not have to go through the same scanners as do pilots, flight attendants and passengers, according to Patrick Smith. I asked the TSA about this, and Horowitz said only that "all airport vendors are subject to the TSA approved airport security screening plan," but did not say specifically one way or the other if they had to go through the scanners.

Conclusion
There are a lot of reasons why the TSA is having a particularly rough time at the moment. To outline a few -- first, the machines are very new and far from ubiquitous, so travelers on an outbound flight might do the usual shoes- and sweaters-off routine, and on the way home find themselves being roughed up by someone wearing blue latex gloves, with little or no warning about what to expect where, when or why.

Second, it appears that the TSA has not truly completed its due diligence -- or very importantly marketing -- on the safety of the machines.

Third, regular travelers and airline professionals alike are tiring of the machinations of an inefficient, impersonal and bullying bureaucracy, particularly one where the people applying the rules so often don't even know the rules, or seem to make them up as they go along.

In truth, a backlash on this issue has been brewing for nearly a decade. I don't think many honest commentators would disagree that the TSA has bumbled and bungled its way to this impasse, even if those same folks would agree that the efforts of the TSA almost certainly have foiled or at the very least discouraged some form of terrorist activities in airports.

The TSA's obligation is to the safety of the public who employs them -- but this must extend not only to keeping terrorists off of planes, but also to keeping travelers safe from potentially harmful X-rays and extremely invasive pat-downs by sometimes unprofessional agents. The word that keeps coming up on all sides of the debate is "balance" -- in the links above you will find that pilots, aggrieved travelers and the head of the TSA alike all use the word to support their very much opposing positions. Everyone agrees that balance is what we need -- but they are standing on opposite ends of the beam.