What documents / info would you like to get from the TSA?
Jul 17, 2014, 3:45 pm
#16
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 67
I'd want to see all the reports from all involved TSA representatives of breaches that have happened at airports since 2002.
If they want a specific one how about the one at Detroit [http://www.wxyz.com/news/detroit-met...t-on-lockdown] on May 29th, 2014.
I'd like to see the report from the Exit guard, his supervisor, and his supervisor's manager.
I'd like to see the emergency response plan for breaches and why using security gates to segregate passengers is their most effective way to mitigate risk in case of active shooter/emergency
I'd like to see the after-action report to the incident on what went wrong, what should they do in the future, how do they prevent another incident from occurring.
If they want a specific one how about the one at Detroit [http://www.wxyz.com/news/detroit-met...t-on-lockdown] on May 29th, 2014.
I'd like to see the report from the Exit guard, his supervisor, and his supervisor's manager.
I'd like to see the emergency response plan for breaches and why using security gates to segregate passengers is their most effective way to mitigate risk in case of active shooter/emergency
I'd like to see the after-action report to the incident on what went wrong, what should they do in the future, how do they prevent another incident from occurring.
Jul 22, 2014, 4:36 am
#17
Original Poster
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 962
a) not already public and
b) not made for "internal decision-making" (which is exempt)?
Also, what's MI?
Already on that.
Jul 22, 2014, 4:39 am
#18
Original Poster
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 962
I'd want to see all the reports from all involved TSA representatives of breaches that have happened at airports since 2002.
If they want a specific one how about the one at Detroit [http://www.wxyz.com/news/detroit-met...t-on-lockdown] on May 29th, 2014.
I'd like to see the report from the Exit guard, his supervisor, and his supervisor's manager.
I'd like to see the emergency response plan for breaches and why using security gates to segregate passengers is their most effective way to mitigate risk in case of active shooter/emergency
I'd like to see the after-action report to the incident on what went wrong, what should they do in the future, how do they prevent another incident from occurring.
If they want a specific one how about the one at Detroit [http://www.wxyz.com/news/detroit-met...t-on-lockdown] on May 29th, 2014.
I'd like to see the report from the Exit guard, his supervisor, and his supervisor's manager.
I'd like to see the emergency response plan for breaches and why using security gates to segregate passengers is their most effective way to mitigate risk in case of active shooter/emergency
I'd like to see the after-action report to the incident on what went wrong, what should they do in the future, how do they prevent another incident from occurring.
Interesting.
Note however that you can't ask them to answer questions (legalspeak: "for creation of new documents"); you can only ask for documents that already exist.
Is there a list of all such breaches somewhere?
Jul 22, 2014, 9:23 am
#19
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 729
As far as the cost-benefit assessments, I am specifically interested in quantifications of risk (i.e., the chance that a specific type of terror attack will occur) and a complete accounting of the costs of the TSA procedures instituted to counter specific types of risk. Those costs should include costs borne by passengers (e.g., cost of delay), not just costs borne by TSA's budget.
Jul 22, 2014, 10:13 am
#20
Original Poster
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 962
Managed Inclusion is the program through which TSA sends random non-PreCheck-registered travelers through PreCheck-style lanes.
As far as the cost-benefit assessments, I am specifically interested in quantifications of risk (i.e., the chance that a specific type of terror attack will occur) and a complete accounting of the costs of the TSA procedures instituted to counter specific types of risk. Those costs should include costs borne by passengers (e.g., cost of delay), not just costs borne by TSA's budget.
As far as the cost-benefit assessments, I am specifically interested in quantifications of risk (i.e., the chance that a specific type of terror attack will occur) and a complete accounting of the costs of the TSA procedures instituted to counter specific types of risk. Those costs should include costs borne by passengers (e.g., cost of delay), not just costs borne by TSA's budget.
I doubt that they would consider delay to be a "cost", so they wouldn't have a document calling it so. (Remember that I have to ask for things in terms that they themselves use.)
However, they should have documents e.g. analyzing the financial cost, throughput reduction / passenger delay, effectiveness, etc of their various procedures (especially the "trial" ones like "say your name"). It'll be tricky to be specific enough about the request that they don't bounce it as "not reasonably described" but broad enough that they have to interpret it as including the things one would want it to include.
I wonder what sort of documents they would have about Managed Inclusion.
The current screening management SOP (which I've already asked for) ought to address when/how people are diverted, so I'm not sure if there's anything not already encompassed by my very extensive previous request that would address this.
Jul 22, 2014, 10:59 am
#21
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: An NPR mind living in a Fox News world
Posts: 14,165
I finally had a few minutes to read your original request. Having been on the receiving end of FOIAs during my federal career, I will unfortunately point out that you used the word that agencies loved to see in FOIAs: "All."
Agencies are very quick to reply by saying that "all" is not specific enough for them to properly respond. We would truthfully respond in this manner and provide suggestions for the requester to bound their request. But, the TSA will lie to you or simply blow you off because there isn't nearly the same level of executive-level oversight of FOIA as their used to be. So much for "transparency."
I would look at each of your paragraphs containing the word "all" and find a way to be as explicit as possible. Let me pick one:
How I would have done it:
If you don't like the first response, you can go back to them with more detail.
I will say, as much as I want you to kick Pistole's butt back to the stone age, that I would have a tough time responding to your request because it is way too detailed and way too broad. You don't want to give them an excuse to stonewall you.
Agencies are very quick to reply by saying that "all" is not specific enough for them to properly respond. We would truthfully respond in this manner and provide suggestions for the requester to bound their request. But, the TSA will lie to you or simply blow you off because there isn't nearly the same level of executive-level oversight of FOIA as their used to be. So much for "transparency."
I would look at each of your paragraphs containing the word "all" and find a way to be as explicit as possible. Let me pick one:
1. All documents provided as part of training TSA agents or contractors, categorized by:
a. Level or assignment of officer receiving such material (e.g. TSO, LTSO, STSO, TSM, FSD, BDO, etc)
b. Date of issuance / distribution
c. Type of document (e.g. initial hire training, update memos, etc)
d. Place(s) used, if not TSA-wide (e.g. if specific to some airport or set of airports)
Please note that this includes documents related to ongoing training, such as changes to policy, specific advisories, re-training, etc.
It also includes all prior versions of training documents (with their validity period and revision number clearly specified).
a. Level or assignment of officer receiving such material (e.g. TSO, LTSO, STSO, TSM, FSD, BDO, etc)
b. Date of issuance / distribution
c. Type of document (e.g. initial hire training, update memos, etc)
d. Place(s) used, if not TSA-wide (e.g. if specific to some airport or set of airports)
Please note that this includes documents related to ongoing training, such as changes to policy, specific advisories, re-training, etc.
It also includes all prior versions of training documents (with their validity period and revision number clearly specified).
0. Include a paragraph about the specific topic you are researching. (Remember, you are trying to be as specific as possible.)
1. Written or electronic training materials that were used by the TSA between <date> and <date> to train TSA officers (patronize them and use the word "officer") for <be specific about the subject>
1. Written or electronic training materials that were used by the TSA between <date> and <date> to train TSA officers (patronize them and use the word "officer") for <be specific about the subject>
I will say, as much as I want you to kick Pistole's butt back to the stone age, that I would have a tough time responding to your request because it is way too detailed and way too broad. You don't want to give them an excuse to stonewall you.
Jul 24, 2014, 7:47 am
#22
Original Poster
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 962
Woops. I screwed up in google docs; you read my request from last week about training documents &c, not my request from last year for policy & procedure documents.
Sorry about that. My original request (from last year) is rather detailed, though it does also say 'all'. They originally denied it as "not reasonably described".
After I sued, TSA "voluntarily" re-opened it, and says that it'll take "months" to conduct the search, that much of it will probably be SSI, but has not yet actually claimed any exemptions.
The standards are whether
a) the request reasonably describes the content sought, and
b) a reasonable amount of search could find those documents (e.g. by being in some sort of index the agency maintains).
In the one you pointed out, your version excludes things (non-written non-electronic materials, e.g. videotape) and requires me to know in advance what all their training categories are (which I don't).
Merely asking for a large amount of material does not make a request "not reasonably described", nor does it make it unreasonable to search for. (So sayeth even the DoJ's FOIA guide.)
In the case of my previous request, as far as I know, it's all on a single internal TSA server, and I had an extensive discussion with their FOIA officer about what kinds of documents they have. The request was based directly on that discussion & other research.
It's broad, yes, but it's clear what I'm asking for and easy to find the responsive documents — and those are the relevant criteria.
In the case of training materials, I expect that there are multiple departments involved, but employee training documents and announcements / memos / etc should be centrally located and easy to search for.
They might not like that I'm asking for all of it, but that doesn't make the request illegitimate.
FWIW, TSA has so far responded to last week's request by:
* denying expedition,
* asking for Privacy Act perjury statements from the people I named in #5, &
* for #3, asking: "What types of other contracts with other entities are you looking for, what is the timeframe, etc."
My response (no counter-response received yet other than the PDF denying expedition):
Sorry about that. My original request (from last year) is rather detailed, though it does also say 'all'. They originally denied it as "not reasonably described".
After I sued, TSA "voluntarily" re-opened it, and says that it'll take "months" to conduct the search, that much of it will probably be SSI, but has not yet actually claimed any exemptions.
Agencies are very quick to reply by saying that "all" is not specific enough for them to properly respond.
a) the request reasonably describes the content sought, and
b) a reasonable amount of search could find those documents (e.g. by being in some sort of index the agency maintains).
In the one you pointed out, your version excludes things (non-written non-electronic materials, e.g. videotape) and requires me to know in advance what all their training categories are (which I don't).
Merely asking for a large amount of material does not make a request "not reasonably described", nor does it make it unreasonable to search for. (So sayeth even the DoJ's FOIA guide.)
In the case of my previous request, as far as I know, it's all on a single internal TSA server, and I had an extensive discussion with their FOIA officer about what kinds of documents they have. The request was based directly on that discussion & other research.
It's broad, yes, but it's clear what I'm asking for and easy to find the responsive documents — and those are the relevant criteria.
In the case of training materials, I expect that there are multiple departments involved, but employee training documents and announcements / memos / etc should be centrally located and easy to search for.
They might not like that I'm asking for all of it, but that doesn't make the request illegitimate.
FWIW, TSA has so far responded to last week's request by:
* denying expedition,
* asking for Privacy Act perjury statements from the people I named in #5, &
* for #3, asking: "What types of other contracts with other entities are you looking for, what is the timeframe, etc."
My response (no counter-response received yet other than the PDF denying expedition):
Regarding item #5, as the individuals I have requested information about are under investigation for their violation of US law against me, I do not have, seek, or need their consent. As I cited in my request, case law holds that the kind of information I requested is not exempt, due to the countervailing public interest.
If you have documents about them, and want to claim exemption, please provide me with actual determinations of exemption together with a Vaughn index thereof.
Regarding item #3, I am particularly interested in contracts that relate to airport screening checkpoints, such as contracts with private firms who act as TSOs, with providers of equipment such as AIT, LCS, and similar devices, etc, and particularly interested in any that are presently in effect.
However, that is only for prioritization.
My request is for *all* contracts that the TSA has with any third party — though if such contracts are duplicative, as stated in the request, a representative contract and list of contractees so contracted would be preferable for me and would narrow the request for you.
My request presumes that the TSA has some kind of central repository for third party contracts to which it is a party, such as with its office of general counsel.
If that is not true and therefore you consider my request too vaguely described to be reasonably searchable, please provide me with an explanation or documentation of your record systems for storing third party contracts, so that I can use it as a reference to tailor my request.
I note that your response letter says "n/a" for fee waiver, but I have in fact requested journalistic and public interest fee waivers. If you require more information about that, please be specific as to what you need.
Regarding your denial of expedited processing, please send me the letter by email as a PDF, rather than by physical mail.
If you have documents about them, and want to claim exemption, please provide me with actual determinations of exemption together with a Vaughn index thereof.
Regarding item #3, I am particularly interested in contracts that relate to airport screening checkpoints, such as contracts with private firms who act as TSOs, with providers of equipment such as AIT, LCS, and similar devices, etc, and particularly interested in any that are presently in effect.
However, that is only for prioritization.
My request is for *all* contracts that the TSA has with any third party — though if such contracts are duplicative, as stated in the request, a representative contract and list of contractees so contracted would be preferable for me and would narrow the request for you.
My request presumes that the TSA has some kind of central repository for third party contracts to which it is a party, such as with its office of general counsel.
If that is not true and therefore you consider my request too vaguely described to be reasonably searchable, please provide me with an explanation or documentation of your record systems for storing third party contracts, so that I can use it as a reference to tailor my request.
I note that your response letter says "n/a" for fee waiver, but I have in fact requested journalistic and public interest fee waivers. If you require more information about that, please be specific as to what you need.
Regarding your denial of expedited processing, please send me the letter by email as a PDF, rather than by physical mail.
Jul 24, 2014, 2:47 pm
#23
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 186
Sai, you might also try contacting Edward Hasbrouck at the Identity Project for info/guidance. He has a lot of experience with FOIA'ing/suing the DHS.
http://www.papersplease.org/wp/
http://www.papersplease.org/wp/
Jul 29, 2014, 6:10 am
#24
Original Poster
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 962
Sai, you might also try contacting Edward Hasbrouck at the Identity Project for info/guidance. He has a lot of experience with FOIA'ing/suing the DHS.
http://www.papersplease.org/wp/
http://www.papersplease.org/wp/
FWIW, I personally am not taking up the "fly with no ID" issue (though I believe they're in the right).
However, my policies & procedures FOIA does encompass policies about demand for ID, at part 2(f). I believe that, at minimum, it is blatantly unconstitutional to have this be a matter of "secret law", and all policies, directives, interpretation of law, etc that affect the traveling public must be made public.
Jul 30, 2014, 1:15 pm
#26
Original Poster
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 962
I generally can't get private information about third parties (though there are exceptions), and 'referrals to LEOs' is ambiguous. Could you be more specific?
Jul 30, 2014, 2:36 pm
#28
Original Poster
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 962
Jul 31, 2014, 11:03 am
#29
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 223
I was thinking of situations when TSA involves local police at a checkpoint and then how the police handle it - do nothing, issue summons, arrest, etc. based on your reply, I doubt that you could get that. Could you request that information in aggregate? Perhaps by airport?
Aug 1, 2014, 9:01 am
#30
Original Poster
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 962
I was thinking of situations when TSA involves local police at a checkpoint and then how the police handle it - do nothing, issue summons, arrest, etc. based on your reply, I doubt that you could get that. Could you request that information in aggregate? Perhaps by airport?
It's possible to do, but it would be a huge pain.
It might be possible to get the TSA's side of things, though — all documents TSA has relating to any TSA referrals to law enforcement agencies. I'll think about it.